Skip to content

fix: expose enable-edge-tag on reusable workflow#1098

Merged
Ron (rjaegers) merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
fix/expose-enable-edge-tag
Jan 22, 2026
Merged

fix: expose enable-edge-tag on reusable workflow#1098
Ron (rjaegers) merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
fix/expose-enable-edge-tag

Conversation

@rjaegers
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

🚀 Hey, I have created a Pull Request

Description of changes

This pull request updates the CI workflow configuration to improve Docker image tagging logic, specifically introducing a new enable-edge-tag parameter that allows more flexible control over when the "edge" Docker tag is built and pushed. The main changes involve propagating this parameter through various workflow files and updating the tagging logic to use the new input.

Workflow parameter additions and propagation:

  • Added a new boolean input parameter enable-edge-tag to both wc-build-push.yml and wc-build-push-test.yml workflows, allowing conditional building and pushing of the "edge" Docker tag. [1] [2]

  • Updated jobs in continuous-integration.yml to pass enable-edge-tag, set based on whether the workflow was triggered by a merge_group event, to downstream build jobs. [1] [2]

Docker image tagging logic update:

  • Changed the Docker tagging logic in wc-build-push.yml to use the new enable-edge-tag input, replacing the previous direct event-based condition, for more explicit and flexible control.

✔️ Checklist

  • I have followed the contribution guidelines for this repository
  • I have added tests for new behavior, and have not broken any existing tests
  • I have added or updated relevant documentation
  • I have verified that all added components are accounted for in the SBOM

@rjaegers Ron (rjaegers) requested a review from a team as a code owner January 22, 2026 12:50
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings January 22, 2026 12:50
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This pull request refactors the Docker image tagging logic to provide more explicit control over when the "edge" tag is built and pushed. Instead of relying on event-based conditions directly in the tagging configuration, the workflow now uses a dedicated enable-edge-tag input parameter that is passed through the workflow chain, improving maintainability and clarity.

Changes:

  • Added enable-edge-tag input parameter to reusable workflows wc-build-push.yml and wc-build-push-test.yml
  • Updated continuous-integration.yml to pass enable-edge-tag based on merge_group event to downstream workflows
  • Simplified Docker tagging logic to use the new input parameter instead of direct event checking

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File Description
.github/workflows/wc-build-push.yml Added enable-edge-tag input and updated tagging logic to use it instead of checking event name directly
.github/workflows/wc-build-push-test.yml Added optional enable-edge-tag input with default value of false
.github/workflows/continuous-integration.yml Updated both base and flavor build jobs to pass enable-edge-tag parameter based on merge_group event

Comment thread .github/workflows/wc-build-push.yml
Comment thread .github/workflows/wc-build-push-test.yml
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Jan 22, 2026

⚠️MegaLinter analysis: Success with warnings

Descriptor Linter Files Fixed Errors Warnings Elapsed time
✅ ACTION actionlint 20 0 0 0.55s
✅ DOCKERFILE hadolint 3 0 0 0.76s
✅ GHERKIN gherkin-lint 6 0 0 2.4s
✅ JSON npm-package-json-lint yes no no 0.47s
✅ JSON prettier 21 4 0 0 0.56s
✅ JSON v8r 21 0 0 7.78s
✅ MARKDOWN markdownlint 11 0 0 0 0.9s
✅ MARKDOWN markdown-table-formatter 11 0 0 0 0.21s
✅ REPOSITORY checkov yes no no 18.05s
✅ REPOSITORY gitleaks yes no no 0.52s
✅ REPOSITORY git_diff yes no no 0.01s
✅ REPOSITORY grype yes no no 28.82s
✅ REPOSITORY secretlint yes no no 0.96s
✅ REPOSITORY syft yes no no 2.0s
✅ REPOSITORY trivy yes no no 5.44s
✅ REPOSITORY trivy-sbom yes no no 0.24s
✅ REPOSITORY trufflehog yes no no 2.26s
⚠️ SPELL lychee 79 4 0 33.68s
✅ YAML prettier 28 0 0 0 0.89s
✅ YAML v8r 28 0 0 8.6s
✅ YAML yamllint 28 0 0 0.61s

Detailed Issues

⚠️ SPELL / lychee - 4 errors
[ERROR] https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ | Network error: error sending request for url (https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/)
[ERROR] https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ | Error (cached)
[IGNORED] docker://pandoc/extra:3.7.0@sha256:a703d335fa237f8fc3303329d87e2555dca5187930da38bfa9010fa4e690933a | Unsupported: Error creating request client: builder error for url (docker://pandoc/extra:3.7.0@sha256:a703d335fa237f8fc3303329d87e2555dca5187930da38bfa9010fa4e690933a)
[403] https://developer.arm.com/downloads/-/arm-gnu-toolchain-downloads | Network error: Forbidden
[ERROR] https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ | Error (cached)
[IGNORED] https://vscode.dev/redirect?url=vscode://ms-vscode-remote.remote-containers/cloneInVolume?url=https://github.com/philips-software/amp-devcontainer | Unsupported: Error creating request client: builder error for url (vscode://ms-vscode-remote.remote-containers/cloneInVolume?url=https://github.com/philips-software/amp-devcontainer)
📝 Summary
---------------------
🔍 Total..........127
✅ Successful.....121
⏳ Timeouts.........0
🔀 Redirected.......0
👻 Excluded.........0
❓ Unknown..........0
🚫 Errors...........4

Errors in .github/CONTRIBUTING.md
[ERROR] https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ | Network error: error sending request for url (https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/)

Errors in .github/workflows/issue-creation-tool-versions.yml
[403] https://developer.arm.com/downloads/-/arm-gnu-toolchain-downloads | Network error: Forbidden

Errors in .github/workflows/pr-conventional-title.yml
[ERROR] https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ | Error (cached)

Errors in README.md
[ERROR] https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/ | Error (cached)

See detailed reports in MegaLinter artifacts

Your project could benefit from a custom flavor, which would allow you to run only the linters you need, and thus improve runtime performances. (Skip this info by defining FLAVOR_SUGGESTIONS: false)

  • Documentation: Custom Flavors
  • Command: npx mega-linter-runner@9.3.0 --custom-flavor-setup --custom-flavor-linters ACTION_ACTIONLINT,DOCKERFILE_HADOLINT,GHERKIN_GHERKIN_LINT,JSON_V8R,JSON_PRETTIER,JSON_NPM_PACKAGE_JSON_LINT,MARKDOWN_MARKDOWNLINT,MARKDOWN_MARKDOWN_TABLE_FORMATTER,REPOSITORY_CHECKOV,REPOSITORY_GIT_DIFF,REPOSITORY_GITLEAKS,REPOSITORY_GRYPE,REPOSITORY_SECRETLINT,REPOSITORY_SYFT,REPOSITORY_TRIVY,REPOSITORY_TRIVY_SBOM,REPOSITORY_TRUFFLEHOG,SPELL_LYCHEE,YAML_PRETTIER,YAML_YAMLLINT,YAML_V8R

MegaLinter is graciously provided by OX Security

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Jan 22, 2026

📦 Container Size Analysis

Note

Comparing ghcr.io/philips-software/amp-devcontainer-base:edgeghcr.io/philips-software/amp-devcontainer-base:pr-1098

📈 Size Comparison Table

OS/Platform Previous Current Change Trend
linux/amd64 165.43 MB 165.43 MB 211 B (0%) 🔽
linux/arm64 158.37 MB 158.37 MB +95 B (+0%) 🔼

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings January 22, 2026 17:21
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

Comment thread .github/workflows/release-build.yml
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📦 Container Size Analysis

Note

Comparing ghcr.io/philips-software/amp-devcontainer-rust:edgeghcr.io/philips-software/amp-devcontainer-rust:pr-1098

📈 Size Comparison Table

OS/Platform Previous Current Change Trend
linux/amd64 545.84 MB 545.84 MB 288 B (0%) 🔽
linux/arm64 500.48 MB 500.48 MB +381 B (+0%) 🔼

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📦 Container Size Analysis

Note

Comparing ghcr.io/philips-software/amp-devcontainer-cpp:edgeghcr.io/philips-software/amp-devcontainer-cpp:pr-1098

📈 Size Comparison Table

OS/Platform Previous Current Change Trend
linux/amd64 681.43 MB 681.43 MB 1.98 kB (0%) 🔽
linux/arm64 663.29 MB 663.29 MB 500 B (0%) 🔽

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Test Results

 7 files  ±0   7 suites  ±0   3m 27s ⏱️ -5s
33 tests ±0  33 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
69 runs  ±0  69 ✅ ±0  0 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 700ee7c. ± Comparison against base commit 46ddc60.

@rjaegers Ron (rjaegers) added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 22, 2026
Merged via the queue into main with commit 5d8ba52 Jan 22, 2026
42 checks passed
@rjaegers Ron (rjaegers) deleted the fix/expose-enable-edge-tag branch January 22, 2026 19:46
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Pull Request Report (#1098)

Static measures

Description Value
Number of added lines 13
Number of deleted lines 4
Number of changed files 4
Number of commits 3
Number of reviews 4
Number of comments (w/o review comments) 6
Number of reviews that contains a comment to resolve 3
Number of reviews that requested a change from the author 0
Number of reviews that approved the Pull Request 1
Get the total number of participants of a Pull Request 6

Time related measures

Description Value
PR lead time (from creation to close of PR) 6.9 Hours
Time that was spend on the branch before the PR was created 1.1 Min
Time that was spend on the branch before the PR was merged 7 Hours
Time to merge after last review 2.4 Hours

Status check related measures

Description Value
Total runtime for last status check run (Workflow for PR) 2.2 Hours
Total time spend in last status check run on PR 1.8 Hours

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🎉 Hooray! The changes in this pull request went live with the release of v6.7.1 🎉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants