Skip to content

ci: update workflow triggers and references - #83

Merged
clouddrove-ci merged 6 commits into
masterfrom
ci/update-workflows
Aug 6, 2026
Merged

ci: update workflow triggers and references#83
clouddrove-ci merged 6 commits into
masterfrom
ci/update-workflows

Conversation

@vineetbavniya-cd

@vineetbavniya-cd vineetbavniya-cd commented Apr 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📌 Description

  • update trigger conditions in GitHub Actions workflows
  • update referenced files across CI workflows

🔄 Type of Change

  • 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change)
  • ✨ New resource / feature
  • ♻️ Refactoring
  • ⚡ Performance improvement
  • 🔒 Security improvement
  • 📝 Documentation update
  • ⚠️ BREAKING CHANGE
  • ⚙️ CI/CD update

🌍 Terraform Scope

  • New resource added
  • Existing resource updated
  • Variable(s) modified
  • Output(s) modified
  • Provider / backend configuration change
  • CI/CD (Terraform workflow) update
  • Examples / usage updated

✅ Checklist

  • Code follows Terraform best practices
  • terraform fmt -recursive and terraform validate have been executed
  • terraform plan has been reviewed and changes are expected
  • Changes are backward compatible (or breaking changes are clearly documented)
  • Documentation has been updated (README, examples, etc.)
  • Variables and outputs are properly defined and documented
  • No sensitive data (secrets, credentials, keys) is exposed

🧩 Terraform Version & Providers

  • Terraform Version:
  • Provider(s):

🧪 Testing

  • Tested locally using terraform plan / apply
  • Tested in a staging / sandbox environment (if applicable)

Test Details:


📸 Screenshots / Documentation


🔗 Related Issues

Closes #


📝 Additional Notes

@vineetbavniya-cd vineetbavniya-cd self-assigned this Apr 10, 2026
@vineetbavniya-cd vineetbavniya-cd added the github_actions Pull requests that update GitHub Actions code label Apr 10, 2026
hahirwar-cd
hahirwar-cd previously approved these changes Apr 10, 2026
ruchit-cd and others added 4 commits July 6, 2026 22:43
Master gained a narrower fix for the same broken shared-workflow references this
branch addresses (#102), which is what put the two in conflict.

Resolved in favour of this branch:

- pr-auto-assignee.yml keeps @v2. Pinning the shared workflows to a tag rather
  than @master is the point of this PR, and it is what would have prevented the
  breakage: a rename on the shared repository's master silently broke every
  caller.
- tfsec.yml is deleted rather than kept. security-tfsec.yml supersedes it, so
  the fix master applied to the old file is redundant.

No @master pins remain. Master's Terraform changes, the extra_tags fix and the
security-group 2.x example migration, are unaffected.
Master gained the spot_schedule_enabled fix (#104), whose whitespace pass
touched the same workflow files this branch rewrites.

Resolved tf-checks.yml in favour of this branch: @v2 pinning, provider aws with
OIDC through BUILD_ROLE, and enable_plan. Master's provider: none predates that
and is what this PR is replacing.
@clouddrove-ci
clouddrove-ci merged commit b950f06 into master Aug 6, 2026
1 check was pending
@clouddrove-ci
clouddrove-ci deleted the ci/update-workflows branch August 6, 2026 20:56
clouddrove-ci added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 6, 2026
The job installed Terraform, TFLint and terraform-docs, then skipped two of them
and appended `|| true`, so it could not fail under any circumstance. Every green
"pre-commit checks" tick on this repository meant nothing.

That is not theoretical. Three genuine failures sat on master behind it: two
whitespace hooks, and a tflint unused-declaration that turned out to be a real
bug where spot_schedule_enabled did nothing at all (#104).

Drop the `|| true` and re-add the trailing newlines that #83 reintroduced, so
the gate passes on the current tree.

terraform_tflint stays skipped. It still reports
terraform_standard_module_structure against the examples, which use example.tf
rather than main.tf by CloudDrove convention across every module. That is a
convention decision rather than a defect, and re-enabling the hook belongs in
its own change alongside whatever is decided.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

github_actions Pull requests that update GitHub Actions code

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants