ci: Fix re-runs in server suite

[sharat87]

Description

Server suite passes on re-runs even if there's test failures. This is leading to false CI green.

This is because we're not adding all the failed tests to the failed test file. We look for failed tests in both the logs and surefire reports. Then we remove the failed-tests-found-in-logs, from the list of failed-tests-in-surefire, and only re-run the rest.

This PR is removing this logic of failed_modules.

Slack conversation.

Automation

/ok-to-test tags=""

🔍 Cypress test results

Caution

If you modify the content in this section, you are likely to disrupt the CI result for your PR.

Communication

Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?

• Yes
• No

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Streamlined the CI build process by simplifying test reporting.
  • Now only skipped tests are highlighted, reducing redundant failure output and simplifying the test workflow.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The workflow file (.github/workflows/server-build.yml) has been updated to remove error-tracking for failed modules during test execution. The removal includes the failed_modules variable and its associated logic for detecting "FAILURE" lines in the test log. The script now only processes lines with "SKIPPED" and outputs solely the skipped modules.

Changes

File	Change Summary
.github/workflows/server-build.yml	Removed the failed_modules variable and associated logic for capturing and echoing "FAILURE" lines; retains processing for "SKIPPED" modules.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant CI as CI Workflow
    participant Script as Build Script
    participant Log as Test Log

    CI->>Script: Initiate server build process
    Script->>Log: Read mvn_test.log file
    Log-->>Script: Provide log lines (e.g., "SKIPPED" messages)
    Script->>Script: Filter and store SKIPPED modules
    Script-->>CI: Output results with skipped modules only

Loading

Possibly related PRs

• fix: Fix server side skip test cases #36572: Involves changes to test result handling and module categorization in CI workflows, aligning with the removal of failed module tracking.

Suggested labels

CI, Bug, ok-to-test

Suggested reviewers

• nidhi-nair
• pratapaprasanna

Poem

In our CI realm, code flows clear,
Failed logs vanish, now disappear.
Only skipped modules hold the light,
Making our builds ever so bright.
Cheers to clean code and flawless night!

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

.github/workflows/server-build.yml (1)

279-281: Minor Formatting Adjustment in PR Comment Posting.
There appears to be an extra newline (or whitespace change) before the PR comment submission. Although this does not impact functionality, please verify that the formatting is consistent with your overall style guidelines.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3788647 and 03382bf.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/server-build.yml (2 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

.github/workflows/server-build.yml (1)

239-244: Simplify Skipped Test Extraction.
The updated while-loop now focuses solely on capturing "SKIPPED" entries by module, thereby removing the previous logic that filtered out "FAILURE" lines. This change aligns with the PR objective by eliminating the failed_modules processing, ensuring that all failed tests are captured via the XML reports for re-run.