Fix actions skipped commit status indicator

[badhezi]

Addresses #34500

[silverwind]

Seems good, but I wonder whether the other two missing statuses from action model should also be represented in commit status. Currently "blocked" and "unknown" are missing:

gitea/models/actions/status.go

Lines 15 to 24 in 14bb8f7

	const (
	StatusUnknown Status = iota // 0, consistent with runnerv1.Result_RESULT_UNSPECIFIED
	StatusSuccess // 1, consistent with runnerv1.Result_RESULT_SUCCESS
	StatusFailure // 2, consistent with runnerv1.Result_RESULT_FAILURE
	StatusCancelled // 3, consistent with runnerv1.Result_RESULT_CANCELLED
	StatusSkipped // 4, consistent with runnerv1.Result_RESULT_SKIPPED
	StatusWaiting // 5, isn't a runnerv1.Result
	StatusRunning // 6, isn't a runnerv1.Result
	StatusBlocked // 7, isn't a runnerv1.Result
	)

[silverwind]

Change is LGMT but we should review the other two potential missing states later.

[ChristopherHX]

For consistency maybe add add

// IsSkipped represents if commit status state is skipped
func (css CommitStatusState) IsSkipped() bool {
	return css == CommitStatusSkipped
}

[lunny]

Commit Status could have skipped, "pending", "success", "error", "failure", "warning"
but combined status should have only failure, pending and success.

Yes this sounds good, the Pullrequest UI only consumes the combined status, if the function combine would then convert skipped to success this should work.

-> I am not sure whether there is any problem in current implementation

Current implementation of Gitea main is good, new problems only appear due to skipped mapped to a new commitstatusskipped. As far I understood the code.

I don't think we can make IsSuccess behave like this. It introduces more ambiguity. skipped is skipped, not success.

Add IsSuccessOrSkipped and use it or inline are my other ideas here. AFAIK The suggestion from lunny would solve the UI part, the code part problem remains when doing that.

EDIT lunny your suggestion could make the commit summary render a green checkmark instead of skipped if everything is skipped.

Also replace IsSuccess with IsSuccessOrSkipped in the Pullrequest UI.

At least this seems to be not like just add a new commit status and everything works.

I sent #34531 to introduce the CombinedStatus concept.

[badhezi]

@lunny / @ChristopherHX
Are there any additional changes needed for this PR?
If the current revision does not break any functionality and just resolves the skipped workflow indication, I suggest we merge this and continue work for CombinedStatus and other suggestions on a different issue.

[ChristopherHX]

@badhezi Seems like my "regression" was not real

This test confirms your PR is fine, skipped never leaks to pull requests

func testAPICreateBranchProtectionWithRepo(t *testing.T, owner, repo, branchName string, body *api.BranchProtection, expectedHTTPStatus int) {
	token := getUserToken(t, "user2", auth_model.AccessTokenScopeWriteRepository)
	req := NewRequestWithJSON(t, "POST", fmt.Sprintf("/api/v1/repos/%s/%s/branch_protections", owner, repo), body).
		AddTokenAuth(token)
	resp := MakeRequest(t, req, expectedHTTPStatus)

	if resp.Code == http.StatusOK {
		var branchProtection api.BranchProtection
		DecodeJSON(t, resp, &branchProtection)
		assert.Equal(t, branchName, branchProtection.RuleName)
	}
}

func TestMergePullRequestWithSkippedTest(t *testing.T) {
	onGiteaRun(t, func(t *testing.T, u *url.URL) {
		// user2 is the owner of the base repo
		user2 := unittest.AssertExistsAndLoadBean(t, &user_model.User{ID: 2})
		user2Token := getTokenForLoggedInUser(t, loginUser(t, user2.Name), auth_model.AccessTokenScopeWriteRepository, auth_model.AccessTokenScopeWriteUser)

		// create the base repo
		apiBaseRepo := createActionsTestRepo(t, user2Token, "merge-pull-request-with-skipped", false)
		baseRepo := unittest.AssertExistsAndLoadBean(t, &repo_model.Repository{ID: apiBaseRepo.ID})
		user2APICtx := NewAPITestContext(t, baseRepo.OwnerName, baseRepo.Name, auth_model.AccessTokenScopeWriteRepository)

		// init the workflow
		wfTreePath := ".gitea/workflows/pull.yml"
		wfFileContent := `name: Pull Request
on:
  pull_request:
jobs:
  echo:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    if: 'false'
    steps:
      - run: echo 'Hello World'
`
		opts1 := getWorkflowCreateFileOptions(user2, baseRepo.DefaultBranch, "create "+wfTreePath, wfFileContent)
		createWorkflowFile(t, user2Token, baseRepo.OwnerName, baseRepo.Name, wfTreePath, opts1)

		// user4 creates a pull request to add file "app/main.go"
		doAPICreateFile(user2APICtx, "app/main.go", &api.CreateFileOptions{
			FileOptions: api.FileOptions{
				NewBranchName: "user4/add-main",
				Message:       "create main.go",
				Author: api.Identity{
					Name:  user2.Name,
					Email: user2.Email,
				},
				Committer: api.Identity{
					Name:  user2.Name,
					Email: user2.Email,
				},
				Dates: api.CommitDateOptions{
					Author:    time.Now(),
					Committer: time.Now(),
				},
			},
			ContentBase64: base64.StdEncoding.EncodeToString([]byte("// main.go")),
		})(t)
		apiPull, err := doAPICreatePullRequest(user2APICtx, baseRepo.OwnerName, baseRepo.Name, baseRepo.DefaultBranch, "user4/add-main")(t)
		assert.NoError(t, err)

		// enable status checks, require the "test1" check to pass
		testAPICreateBranchProtectionWithRepo(t, baseRepo.OwnerName, baseRepo.Name, baseRepo.DefaultBranch, &api.BranchProtection{
			BlockAdminMergeOverride: true,
			RuleName:                baseRepo.DefaultBranch,
			EnableStatusCheck:       true,
			StatusCheckContexts:     []string{"Pull Request / echo (pull_request)"},
		}, http.StatusCreated)

		runner := newMockRunner()
		runner.registerAsRepoRunner(t, user2.Name, baseRepo.Name, "mock-runner", []string{"ubuntu-latest"}, false)

		// TODO remove this once we have a way to skip jobs on Gitea side
		task := runner.fetchTask(t)
		runner.execTask(t, task, &mockTaskOutcome{
			result: runnerv1.Result_RESULT_SKIPPED,
		})

		doAPIMergePullRequest(user2APICtx, baseRepo.OwnerName, baseRepo.Name, apiPull.Index)(t)

		pullRequest := unittest.AssertExistsAndLoadBean(t, &issues_model.PullRequest{ID: apiPull.ID})
		_ = pullRequest
	})
}