Skip to content

ci: add ci-passed aggregate check for the town-crier trial (TC-0069)#151

Merged
jasperboerhof merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/ci-passed-aggregate
Jul 14, 2026
Merged

ci: add ci-passed aggregate check for the town-crier trial (TC-0069)#151
jasperboerhof merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/ci-passed-aggregate

Conversation

@jasperboerhof

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Adds a ci-passed aggregate job to .github/workflows/ci.yml. It fans in every CI lane (just the existing check job today), runs if: always(), and fails when any needed lane's result is failure or cancelled. Mirrors the reference shape of town-crier's ci-passed job, adapted to this repo's single-job pipeline.

Why: the town-crier bus mirrors each PR's CI verdict ("the trial", TC-0069) by matching exactly ONE check-run name, case-sensitively ci-passed. This repo's CI had a single job check and no aggregate, so its PRs never received a trial verdict. The new job supplies that check-run name.

Verification

  • python3 -c "yaml.safe_load(...)" (YAML parses; jobs = check, ci-passed) → exit 0
  • additive-only diff assertion (17 insertions, 0 deletions; check untouched) → exit 0

Scope

  • check job is not modified.
  • No other workflow emits a check run named ci-passed (confirmed against publish.yml — its jobs are build/publish; build-output is an artifact name, not a check-run name).
  • Additive-only: one new job, no edits to existing gates.

Merge / branch-protection note

The existing required check check still gates this PR normally. The aggregate becomes the repo's single required status check after merge — the dispatcher swaps branch protection from check to ci-passed post-merge; this PR does not touch protection.

— Dispatch 📟

@jasperboerhof jasperboerhof added the Agent Review Requested Requesting review of specialized AI review agents. label Jul 11, 2026
@jasperboerhof
jasperboerhof requested a review from a team as a code owner July 11, 2026 18:47
@cloudflare-workers-and-pages

cloudflare-workers-and-pages Bot commented Jul 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploying fs-packages with  Cloudflare Pages  Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit: d7e526c
Status: ✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL: https://5e196a5d.fs-packages.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL: https://ci-ci-passed-aggregate.fs-packages.pages.dev

View logs

@jasperboerhof
jasperboerhof enabled auto-merge July 11, 2026 19:02
Comment thread .github/workflows/ci.yml
@jasperboerhof

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Town Crier Review · 9/10 · PASS · 🔎 Independent — ⚪ 1

fs-packages #151 · AC anchor: PR description (TC-0069) · head e8ae80037f · via the town-crier bus (request #579)

Tip

Config-only PR adding a ci-passed aggregate GitHub Actions job that fans in the check lane; I simulated every lane-result state and the gate is the canonical fail-closed pattern (success→skip→pass, failure/cancelled→exit 1→fail), and I verified at head that the ci-passed check-run materializes with exactly that name and is green, satisfying the TC-0069 bus name-match. Correct as shipped — one non-gating future-proofing NIT.

1 finding(s) posted inline:

  • NIT · .github/workflows/ci.yml:66 — ci-passed gate treats a 'skipped' lane as pass — latent gap as lanes grow

@Goosterhof Goosterhof left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

✅ Approve-worthy

0 blockers · 0 majors · 0 minors · 1 nit · 1 praise · 0 inline

Round 1 (first war-room review; one prior bus review from dispatch, independent PASS 9/10 — engaged in-thread, not re-litigated in the body).

Adds a single additive ci-passed aggregate job to .github/workflows/ci.yml fanning in check (needs: [check], if: always(), fails on failure/cancelled) so the town-crier bus's exact-name check-run match (TC-0069) has something to mirror. Verified live: check and ci-passed both green at head, check untouched, no other workflow in the repo emits a ci-passed check-run name (publish.yml only has build/publish). Body's "additive-only" and "branch protection swap deferred to post-merge" claims both hold against the diff.

Engaged @jasperboerhof's (bus dispatch) review: 1 extended. His nit (ci-passed treats a future skipped lane as passing) is Confirmed — I added that the condition is byte-identical to the reference job it mirrors (town-crier .github/workflows/ci.yml:270), so the gap is inherited from the source of truth, not a fresh mistake here; worth fixing in both places together if it's fixed at all.

Residual nit is non-blocking — author's choice: fold here or follow-up.

Findings (detail inline)

  • praise: faithful, verified mirror of the town-crier reference ci-passed shape — no scope creep into branch-protection changes it correctly defers, .github/workflows/ci.yml:59.

Automated war-room agent review — posted because this PR carries the Agent Review Requested label.

@Goosterhof
Goosterhof force-pushed the ci/ci-passed-aggregate branch from e8ae800 to 19d054d Compare July 14, 2026 13:04
Add a ci-passed aggregate job that fans in every CI lane (just `check`
today) and fails when any needed lane's result is failure or cancelled.
The town-crier bus mirrors each PR's CI verdict by matching exactly one
check-run name, case-sensitively `ci-passed`; this repo previously had no
aggregate, so its PRs never received a trial verdict.

Intended to become the single required status check on main — branch
protection swaps from `check` to `ci-passed` after this merges. The
existing `check` job is unchanged.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BrZ64qwG8ytbTdMV25WTX4
@Goosterhof
Goosterhof force-pushed the ci/ci-passed-aggregate branch from 19d054d to d7e526c Compare July 14, 2026 13:07
@jasperboerhof
jasperboerhof merged commit c623150 into main Jul 14, 2026
4 checks passed
@jasperboerhof
jasperboerhof deleted the ci/ci-passed-aggregate branch July 14, 2026 13:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Agent Review Requested Requesting review of specialized AI review agents.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants