add support for [GitHubWorkflowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation #3898

calebcartwright · 2019-08-19T23:15:02Z

Refs #2574 - I'm not sure if this is the way we want to go, but opening for discussion.

~~I also don't know enough about GitHub Actions to know the full scope of values we may see in the badges, and whether isBuildStatus will sufficiently cover those~~ Edit - This is scraping GH's workflow status badge which AFAICT uses typical result statuses we use isBuildStatus for

shields-ci · 2019-08-19T23:15:49Z

	Messages
📖	✨ Thanks for your contribution to Shields, @calebcartwright!

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 5236cd9

calebcartwright · 2019-08-20T23:11:51Z

The Heroku review apps seem to no longer like me 😄

Error: Cannot find module 'is-css-color'
Require stack:
- /tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/gh-badges/lib/color.js
- /tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/lib/logos.js
- /tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/core/base-service/coalesce-badge.js
- /tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/core/base-service/base.js
- /tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/core/base-service/loader.js
- /tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/scripts/export-service-definitions-cli.js
    at Function.Module._resolveFilename (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:713:15)
    at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:618:27)
    at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:771:19)
    at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:68:18)
    at Object.<anonymous> (/tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/gh-badges/lib/color.js:3:20)
    at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:868:30)
    at Object.Module._extensions..js (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:879:10)
    at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:731:32)
    at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:644:12)
    at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:771:19) {
  code: 'MODULE_NOT_FOUND',
  requireStack: [
    '/tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/gh-badges/lib/color.js',
    '/tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/lib/logos.js',
    '/tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/core/base-service/coalesce-badge.js',
    '/tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/core/base-service/base.js',
    '/tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/core/base-service/loader.js',
    '/tmp/build_c23bc303820126400ec74975c33f173e/scripts/export-service-definitions-cli.js'
  ]
}
npm ERR! code ELIFECYCLE

chris48s · 2019-08-22T20:21:55Z

In terms of a validator, the scope of 'actions' is much larger than a CI service. They can be used to deploy, build/publish packages, send notifications, etc ( see https://github.com/marketplace?type=actions for examples ) so I'd expect we'd see a much wider range of values here.

Beyond that, the code for this is fine. My main reservation with this is relying on this endpoint given we don't have any docs from GitHub acknowledging it exists. At least we know the beta API endpoint is documented as being in beta. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

paulmelnikow · 2019-08-22T21:13:12Z

I don’t feel strongly, though I’d lean toward using the API. We have a lot of quota so that doesn’t seem like a main concern.

calebcartwright · 2019-08-22T22:02:18Z

At least we know the beta API endpoint is documented as being in beta. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

I don’t feel strongly, though I’d lean toward using the API.

I'd always prefer using an API 😄 I had intended to open up an implementation using the API as well for comparison & discussion but got distracted.

We have a lot of quota so that doesn’t seem like a main concern.

I don't disagree, and I'm definitely not pushing for the SvgScraping implementation (I'd vote for the API as well). My thought process was that long term we may have some questions around quota (for example what the GraphQL API impact may or may not be), and whether Shields being able to provide a badge for GitHub data without hitting the quota would be a plus. Especially since I could see GH Actions/Worklow badges quickly becoming one of our most heavily used badges, and we'd presumably have some set of folks switching from Circle/Travis/etc. badges to these.

IMO it is a plus, but a pretty small one that wouldn't change my vote.

In terms of a validator, the scope of 'actions' is much larger than a CI service. They can be used to deploy, build/publish packages, send notifications, etc

I realized that the upstream badge GitHub is providing and used here is really more of a Workflow Status badge vs. individual actions, so the PR title/Service class name/etc. here should be updated to be more precise.

It would not surprise me at all if there are additional states that may be involved here, but I would note that a GitHub workflow in that context really isn't any different than Jenkins, Azure DevOps, Circle, etc. Those can/are used to do many of the same sort of steps with orchestration, but at the end of the day the top level pipeline/workflow/etc. still has some final status that conveys a more wholistic pass/fail/etc. state, and so accordingly do our badges.

calebcartwright · 2019-11-14T18:58:52Z

Now that GH Actions has come out of beta, the native status badges support an optional query param for branch specification (which was the biggest feature gap with this approach).

I'll check to see if the CheckSuites API now provides a way to query/filter based on workflow name now too. If not, I think we'll need to go with this approach so that users can specify both the workflow and branch names

calebcartwright · 2019-11-17T17:40:06Z

In the spirit of not allowing perfection to be the enemy of the good (enough), I think we should go ahead with this approach to support GitHub Actions/Workflows. I know there's a collective preference for APIs over badge scraping (myself included), but I've still not found away to use the GitHub Checks Suite API (which is much broader and more generic than GH Actions) that supports getting the status of a specific workflow by workflow-name.

If/when we discover an alternative way to to get the data, we can always swap out our implementation at that time. However, there's a ton of interest for GH Actions and IMHO we should proceed with delivering this badge to the communtiy.

With GitHub recently adding support for branch querying, the only outstanding item (AFAIK) with this PR is a question/concern @chris48s raised regarding using the isBuildStatus helper in the schema validation (one which I too originally shared, but am no longer concerned with).

While I agree that GH actions can/are used for all sorts of things, the badge being scraped here is the workflow status badge: https://help.github.com/en/actions/automating-your-workflow-with-github-actions/configuring-a-workflow#adding-a-workflow-status-badge-to-your-repository

Status badges show whether a workflow is currently failing or passing.

Based on the text from those docs, as well as what I've seen, I'm fairly confident that this status badge will follow the standard pass/fail variant status message that we see from other CI/pipeline platforms. Yes there will be all sorts of actions and activities that occur within a workflow, but I expect the final status value that our schema will validate will align well with isBuildStatus.

On the off chance that GH's native status badge can contain wildly different status values (for example a test summary message like 10 passed, 1 failed, etc.) then I feel it'd probably be better for us to fail loudly with a schema validation error and have users report the specifics so we can handle it accordingly as we'd likely need some additional work (render logic for example).

calebcartwright · 2019-11-17T17:41:52Z

Here's an example of a repo with multiple-workflows that illustrate why it's important for users to be able to specify both the branch and workflow they want a badge for

https://github.com/rust-lang/mdBook/tree/master/.github/workflows

https://shields-staging-pr-3898.herokuapp.com/github/actions/rust-lang/mdBook/CI/master

https://shields-staging-pr-3898.herokuapp.com/github/actions/rust-lang/mdBook/Deploy/master

https://shields-staging-pr-3898.herokuapp.com/github/actions/rust-lang/mdBook/Deploy/gh-pages

And here's an even better example repo over in the Apache org that really emphasizes why workflow name is critical 😄

https://github.com/apache/arrow/actions

smorimoto · 2019-11-20T22:35:25Z

I can't wait this! Thanks for your effort @calebcartwright!

calebcartwright · 2019-11-25T00:13:04Z

I'm also leaning towards renaming the route/class/etc. to refer to this as GitHubWorkflowStatus and /github/workflow/status (or GitHubActionsWorkflowStatus and /github/actions/workflow/status) and will include actions in the keywords for searchability.

That's because there can be multiple jobs within a workflow, and it's highly likely IMO that we'll want to support job status badges in the future (github/workflow/job/status etc.)

Thoughts?

PyvesB · 2019-11-25T21:14:56Z

I'm also leaning towards renaming the route/class/etc. to refer to this as GitHubWorkflowStatus and /github/workflow/status (or GitHubActionsWorkflowStatus and /github/actions/workflow/status) and will include actions in the keywords for searchability.

That's because there can be multiple jobs within a workflow, and it's highly likely IMO that we'll want to support job status badges in the future (github/workflow/job/status etc.)

Thoughts?

I would go with the shorter /github/workflow/status form and include "actions" as a keyword as you suggested.

PyvesB

Looks good to me. Will re-review promptly when the aforementioned path name change is implemented 👍

PyvesB · 2019-11-25T21:16:16Z

services/github/github-actions.tester.js

+  .get('/actions/toolkit/Main%20workflow.json')
+  .expectBadge({
+    label: 'build',
+    message: isBuildStatus,


Maybe worth adding the no status case to avoid flaky tests?

Good catch!

shields-deployment · 2019-11-27T13:36:41Z

This pull request was merged to master branch. This change is now waiting for deployment, which will usually happen within a few days. Stay tuned by joining our #ops channel on Discord!

After deployment, changes are copied to gh-pages branch:

smorimoto · 2019-11-27T13:47:30Z

👏

svoop · 2019-11-27T18:07:09Z

Big thanks, @calebcartwright 🎉

calebcartwright · 2019-11-27T18:13:22Z

Just a heads up for anyone following this thread.. it's going to be a bit longer before this is deployed and available

chris48s · 2019-11-27T19:02:42Z

Thanks for getting this one over the line. Sorry I didn't get a chance to post earlier, but now that GitHub are documenting this exists, I think its fine to rely on it. Also agree on validation schema 👍

As a slight tangent, it is interesting to see GH starting to serve and support their own badges. I wonder if we will see more popping up. One to keep an eye on 👀

calebcartwright · 2019-11-28T05:09:35Z

I stand corrected 😆 this is live! Thanks @paulmelnikow for getting this shipped so quickly 🎉

Some examples:
https://img.shields.io/github/workflow/status/apache/arrow/Python?style=flat-square

And one with all sorts of Shields-customization goodness
https://img.shields.io/github/workflow/status/apache/arrow/Python?color=orange&label=actions&logo=github&logoColor=orange&style=for-the-badge

smorimoto · 2019-11-28T05:10:16Z

WOW! Thank you @paulmelnikow!

arcanis · 2020-01-27T23:32:48Z

GitHub Actions now have a fresh new API, might be useful to get the workflow names and statuses without scrapping: https://developer.github.com/v3/actions/

calebcartwright · 2020-01-28T01:48:05Z

Thanks for letting us know @arcanis!

feat: add BaseSvgScraping service impl for GH Actions

63b1e2d

calebcartwright added the service-badge New or updated service badge label Aug 19, 2019

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 August 19, 2019 23:15 Inactive

chore: fix GH Actions service test name

33f021c

shields-cd had a problem deploying to shields-staging-pr-3898 August 20, 2019 19:40 Failure

Merge branch 'master' into gh-actions-svg-scraping

7d50198

shields-cd had a problem deploying to shields-staging-pr-3898 August 20, 2019 23:12 Failure

Merge branch 'master' into gh-actions-svg-scraping

0611bfc

shields-cd had a problem deploying to shields-staging-pr-3898 August 21, 2019 23:18 Failure

calebcartwright mentioned this pull request Aug 22, 2019

fix package-lock.json to restore heroku deploys #3904

Merged

Merge branch 'master' into gh-actions-svg-scraping

e02ae1e

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 August 24, 2019 20:38 Inactive

This was referenced Aug 25, 2019

add support for [GitHubActions] via API #3913

Closed

Badge request: GitHub actions #2574

Closed

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 September 1, 2019 20:50 Inactive

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 September 8, 2019 20:54 Inactive

h1nk mentioned this pull request Oct 22, 2019

Add badges for pyup #1664

Open

Merge branch 'master' into gh-actions-svg-scraping

72dc4ea

calebcartwright and others added 3 commits November 15, 2019 15:21

feat: add branch support to GH Actions/Workflows

a0a2591

Merge branch 'master' into gh-actions-svg-scraping

9594d32

Merge branch 'master' into gh-actions-svg-scraping

b7daf62

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 November 17, 2019 16:43 Inactive

chore: fix schema for GH actions

0b55c35

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 November 17, 2019 17:09 Inactive

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 November 23, 2019 16:11 Inactive

PyvesB previously approved these changes Nov 25, 2019

View reviewed changes

refactor: update route path per PR discussion

21e0063

calebcartwright dismissed PyvesB’s stale review via 21e0063 November 26, 2019 00:19

shields-cd temporarily deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 November 26, 2019 00:19 Inactive

calebcartwright changed the title ~~add support for [GitHubActions] using BaseSvgScraping service implementation~~ add support for [GitHubWorklowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation Nov 26, 2019

Merge branch 'master' into gh-actions-svg-scraping

5236cd9

shields-cd deployed to shields-staging-pr-3898 November 26, 2019 00:43 View deployment

calebcartwright changed the title ~~add support for [GitHubWorklowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation~~ add support for [GitHubWorkflowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation Nov 26, 2019

PyvesB approved these changes Nov 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

calebcartwright merged commit c455993 into master Nov 27, 2019

calebcartwright deleted the gh-actions-svg-scraping branch November 27, 2019 13:36

calebcartwright mentioned this pull request Jan 28, 2020

Switch GitHub Workflow Status Badge to API #4587

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

add support for [GitHubWorkflowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation #3898

add support for [GitHubWorkflowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation #3898

calebcartwright commented Aug 19, 2019 •

edited

Loading

shields-ci commented Aug 19, 2019 •

edited

Loading

calebcartwright commented Aug 20, 2019

chris48s commented Aug 22, 2019

paulmelnikow commented Aug 22, 2019

calebcartwright commented Aug 22, 2019 •

edited

Loading

calebcartwright commented Nov 14, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 17, 2019 •

edited

Loading

calebcartwright commented Nov 17, 2019 •

edited

Loading

smorimoto commented Nov 20, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 25, 2019

PyvesB commented Nov 25, 2019

PyvesB left a comment •

edited

Loading

PyvesB Nov 25, 2019

calebcartwright Nov 25, 2019

shields-deployment bot commented Nov 27, 2019

smorimoto commented Nov 27, 2019

svoop commented Nov 27, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 27, 2019

chris48s commented Nov 27, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 28, 2019

smorimoto commented Nov 28, 2019

arcanis commented Jan 27, 2020

calebcartwright commented Jan 28, 2020

add support for [GitHubWorkflowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation #3898

add support for [GitHubWorkflowStatus] (Actions) using BaseSvgScraping service implementation #3898

Conversation

calebcartwright commented Aug 19, 2019 • edited Loading

shields-ci commented Aug 19, 2019 • edited Loading

calebcartwright commented Aug 20, 2019

chris48s commented Aug 22, 2019

paulmelnikow commented Aug 22, 2019

calebcartwright commented Aug 22, 2019 • edited Loading

calebcartwright commented Nov 14, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 17, 2019 • edited Loading

calebcartwright commented Nov 17, 2019 • edited Loading

smorimoto commented Nov 20, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 25, 2019

PyvesB commented Nov 25, 2019

PyvesB left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PyvesB Nov 25, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

calebcartwright Nov 25, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shields-deployment bot commented Nov 27, 2019

smorimoto commented Nov 27, 2019

svoop commented Nov 27, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 27, 2019

chris48s commented Nov 27, 2019

calebcartwright commented Nov 28, 2019

smorimoto commented Nov 28, 2019

arcanis commented Jan 27, 2020

calebcartwright commented Jan 28, 2020

calebcartwright commented Aug 19, 2019 •

edited

Loading

shields-ci commented Aug 19, 2019 •

edited

Loading

calebcartwright commented Aug 22, 2019 •

edited

Loading

calebcartwright commented Nov 17, 2019 •

edited

Loading

calebcartwright commented Nov 17, 2019 •

edited

Loading

PyvesB left a comment •

edited

Loading