feat(ISV-6605): Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces version by RichardPlesnik · Pull Request #928 · redhat-openshift-ecosystem/operator-pipelines

RichardPlesnik · 2026-04-14T14:07:36Z

Merge Request Checklists

This PR adds existence check validation to propagate readable error message when operator replaces field specifies nonexistent version.

Example of failing static-checks with python traceback before the fix:
redhat-openshift-ecosystem/community-operators-pipeline-preprod#338

Example of fixed error propagation:
RichardPlesnik/community-operators-pipeline-preprod#9

Passing integration tests:
redhat-openshift-ecosystem/operator-pipelines-test#3279

qodo-code-review · 2026-04-14T14:07:58Z

Review Summary by Qodo

Fix replaces version validation and add error handling

🐞 Bug fix 🧪 Tests

Walkthroughs

Description

• Add validation for non-existent replaces version in bundle checks
  - Prevents KeyError when replaces version doesn't exist
  - Provides clear error message with available versions
• Add comprehensive test for non-existent version replacement scenario
• Code formatting improvements and cleanup
  - Remove extra blank lines in imports
  - Reformat multi-line string literals
• Update dependencies and configuration
  - Upgrade pytest to version 9.0.3
  - Use dynamic Ansible Python interpreter path

Diagram

flowchart LR
  A["Bundle with invalid replaces version"] -->|check_replaces_availability| B["Validate version exists in ver_to_dir"]
  B -->|Version not found| C["Yield Fail with clear error message"]
  B -->|Version found| D["Continue with bundle checks"]
  E["Test case"] -->|Verify error handling| C

File Changes

1. operator-pipeline-images/operatorcert/static_tests/community/bundle.py 🐞 Bug fix +8/-0

Add replaces version existence validation
• Add validation check before accessing replaces version in dictionary
• Yield Fail result with descriptive error message when version not found
• Include list of available versions in error message for debugging
operator-pipeline-images/operatorcert/static_tests/community/bundle.py

2. operator-pipeline-images/tests/static_tests/community/test_bundle.py 🧪 Tests +28/-0

Add test for non-existent replaces version
• Add new test function for non-existent version replacement scenario
• Verify error message contains version and available versions list
• Test that Fail result is properly generated
operator-pipeline-images/tests/static_tests/community/test_bundle.py

3. operator-pipeline-images/operatorcert/entrypoints/bulk_retrigger.py Formatting +0/-1

Remove extra blank line in imports
• Remove extra blank line after imports
operator-pipeline-images/operatorcert/entrypoints/bulk_retrigger.py

View more (5)

4. operator-pipeline-images/operatorcert/entrypoints/integration_tests.py Formatting +0/-1

Remove extra blank line in imports
• Remove extra blank line after imports
operator-pipeline-images/operatorcert/entrypoints/integration_tests.py

5. operator-pipeline-images/tests/integration/conftest.py Formatting +4/-8

Reformat multi-line string literals
• Reformat multi-line string literals to single-line format
• Improve code readability and consistency
operator-pipeline-images/tests/integration/conftest.py

6. operator-pipeline-images/tests/test_tekton.py Formatting +2/-4

Reformat multi-line string literals
• Reformat multi-line string literals to single-line format
• Improve code readability and consistency
operator-pipeline-images/tests/test_tekton.py

7. ansible/inventory/group_vars/operator-pipeline.yml ⚙️ Configuration changes +1/-1

Use dynamic Ansible Python interpreter path
• Replace hardcoded Python interpreter path with dynamic Ansible variable
• Use {{ ansible_playbook_python }} for better portability
ansible/inventory/group_vars/operator-pipeline.yml

8. pyproject.toml Dependencies +1/-1

Upgrade pytest dependency version
• Upgrade pytest dependency from 7.3.2 to 9.0.3
pyproject.toml

qodo-code-review · 2026-04-14T14:07:59Z

Code Review by Qodo

🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📎 Requirement gaps (0)

Great, no issues found!

Qodo reviewed your code and found no material issues that require review

ⓘ The new review experience is currently in Beta. Learn more

BorekZnovustvoritel

LGTM for the changes. Just wondering why this test is applicable in community operators only. Maybe it should be a common test? Let me know if I missed something.

RichardPlesnik · 2026-04-15T11:29:12Z

LGTM for the changes. Just wondering why this test is applicable in community operators only. Maybe it should be a common test? Let me know if I missed something.

Good point. I moved it to separate test into common/ folder.

…version

RichardPlesnik · 2026-04-27T13:13:17Z

Update: After a discussion with Ales, I moved existing test to common folder to run on all workflows and extended them with bundle existence check.

It was tested on last static-checks run on this PR: RichardPlesnik/community-operators-pipeline-preprod#9

BorekZnovustvoritel

I have hard time understanding the test present. Please join my comments with some hints how to understand it better.

BorekZnovustvoritel · 2026-04-27T14:03:25Z

+
+
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+    "bundle_version_annotation,replaces_version_annotation,replaces_csv_value,ocp_range,expected",


The parameters are not easy to understand from their names. What is annotated in the new operator version and what was already present in the repo?

These tests were just moved from the previous version from community static-tests, but I can update parameters naming.

BorekZnovustvoritel · 2026-04-27T14:08:11Z

+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+    "bundle_version_annotation,replaces_version_annotation,replaces_csv_value,ocp_range,expected",
+    [
+        pytest.param(None, None, None, [], set(), id="No replaces"),


Should this case really return no failure? What is tested here? Is the added bundle valid by other validation standards?

It was moved form the community validation.

Replaces field is not required (and not present in check_required_fields validation). It is valid to omit this field when there is no previous version of the bundle in the channel. In other cases, this would cause dangling bundle and the issue would be caught by check_dangling_bundles static check.

BorekZnovustvoritel · 2026-04-27T14:21:02Z

+    "bundle_version_annotation,replaces_version_annotation,replaces_csv_value,ocp_range,expected",
+    [
+        pytest.param(None, None, None, [], set(), id="No replaces"),
+        pytest.param(None, None, "hello.v0.0.1", [], set(), id="No annotations"),


Why is it ok to replace an obsolete version? This would create 2 channel heads in reality, no?

It was moved form the community validation.

It is not replacing obsolete version. Annotations field is not required and when it is missing, it uses all available OCP versions.

BorekZnovustvoritel

I won't block you with this, since you are not the original author of the tests that confuse me. I didn't find anything else that would confuse me.

openshift-ci Bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 14, 2026

RichardPlesnik force-pushed the ISV-6605 branch from d88ce04 to 78916be Compare April 14, 2026 14:13

openshift-ci Bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 14, 2026

RichardPlesnik force-pushed the ISV-6605 branch from 78916be to ed823f4 Compare April 14, 2026 14:14

RichardPlesnik changed the title ~~[ISV-6605] Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces version~~ feat(ISV-6605): Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces version Apr 14, 2026

RichardPlesnik requested review from BorekZnovustvoritel and JakubDurkac and removed request for BorekZnovustvoritel and JakubDurkac April 14, 2026 14:20

RichardPlesnik force-pushed the ISV-6605 branch from ed823f4 to 19926cd Compare April 14, 2026 14:22

RichardPlesnik requested review from BorekZnovustvoritel and JakubDurkac April 15, 2026 09:15

BorekZnovustvoritel approved these changes Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

JakubDurkac approved these changes Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

RichardPlesnik force-pushed the ISV-6605 branch from 1843760 to ca03f7b Compare April 15, 2026 12:49

RichardPlesnik changed the title ~~feat(ISV-6605): Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces version~~ draft: feat(ISV-6605): Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces version Apr 15, 2026

feat(ISV-6605): Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces …

5060635

…version

RichardPlesnik force-pushed the ISV-6605 branch from ca03f7b to 5060635 Compare April 27, 2026 13:09

RichardPlesnik added ready-for-testing labels Apr 27, 2026

RichardPlesnik changed the title ~~draft: feat(ISV-6605): Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces version~~ feat(ISV-6605): Fix static-tests error message on incorrect replaces version Apr 27, 2026

RichardPlesnik requested review from BorekZnovustvoritel and JakubDurkac April 27, 2026 13:19

BorekZnovustvoritel reviewed Apr 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

BorekZnovustvoritel approved these changes Apr 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

JakubDurkac approved these changes Apr 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

RichardPlesnik merged commit 6d2eea8 into main Apr 29, 2026
20 of 22 checks passed

RichardPlesnik deleted the ISV-6605 branch April 29, 2026 10:39

JakubDurkac mentioned this pull request May 7, 2026

feat(ISV-7180): Fail static check when bundle attempts to replace itself #947

Merged

11 tasks



		@pytest.mark.parametrize(
		"bundle_version_annotation,replaces_version_annotation,replaces_csv_value,ocp_range,expected",

Conversation

RichardPlesnik commented Apr 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merge Request Checklists

Uh oh!

qodo-code-review Bot commented Apr 14, 2026

Review Summary by Qodo

Walkthroughs

File Changes

Uh oh!

qodo-code-review Bot commented Apr 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Code Review by Qodo

Great, no issues found!

Uh oh!

BorekZnovustvoritel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

RichardPlesnik commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

RichardPlesnik commented Apr 27, 2026

Uh oh!

BorekZnovustvoritel left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BorekZnovustvoritel Apr 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

RichardPlesnik Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BorekZnovustvoritel Apr 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

RichardPlesnik Apr 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BorekZnovustvoritel Apr 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

RichardPlesnik Apr 29, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BorekZnovustvoritel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

RichardPlesnik commented Apr 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

qodo-code-review Bot commented Apr 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

BorekZnovustvoritel left a comment •

edited

Loading

RichardPlesnik Apr 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading