fix(ci): add unit_tests to coverage job needs to prevent misleading parallel results #10884
Labels
Clear labels
auto/needs-reevaluation
controller-managed
overdue
auto/blocked-by-deps
auto/ci-timeout
auto/claimed-implementer
auto/claimed-merge
auto/claimed-reviewer
auto/driver-down
auto/invariant-violation
auto/last-attempt-tier-0
auto/last-attempt-tier-1
auto/last-attempt-tier-2
auto/last-attempt-tier-min
Automation Tracking
auto/needs-conflict-resolution
auto/needs-implementer
auto/postmortem
auto/ready-to-merge
auto/restart-throttled
auto/revert
auto/sentinel
auto/stale-inactivity
auto/unstable
Blocked
Needs Feedback
Signed-off: Owner
Signed-off: Scrum Master
Signed-off: Tech Lead
Spike
Controller deferred this PR; awaiting Phase 6+ scope-evaluator or operator re-enablement.
Auto-agents controller manages this PR/issue (see tools/controller/deploy/RUNBOOK.md). Remove this label to abandon controller management.
PR blocked by an open issue dependency. Operator must close the dep (or remove the dependency link) before the merge driver can act. Auto-cleared by merge_drive when no open deps remain.
Most recent merge cycle hit CI timeout. Driver excludes this PR while last merge_cycle row is < 30 min old; label persists thereafter as visible history.
Currently being processed by an implementer worker.
Currently being processed by the merge driver.
Currently being processed by a reviewer worker.
Merge driver heartbeat stale; pipeline halted. Closed automatically on next clean tick.
Detected master commit violating the strict merge invariant. Tracked as an issue (not a PR label); kept here for label completeness.
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 0 slot (`tier-0`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 1 slot (`tier-1`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 2 slot (`tier-2`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml. Gated behind IMPLEMENTER_ESCALATION_TIER2_ENABLED.
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier -1 slot (`tier-min`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml. Suffix is ``-min`` (not ``--1``) so the Forgejo UI reads naturally.
Tracking issues used by the AI Automation system for agents to communicate and report.
Rebase conflict needs LLM conflict-resolver.
Failing CI needs implementer attention.
Documenting a driver incident or rollback.
Reviewer has APPROVED this PR and no later REQUEST_CHANGES is outstanding. The merge driver requires this label to even consider a PR for merging. Set by the reviewer worker on APPROVE; cleared on REQUEST_CHANGES.
Train repeatedly lost master-tempo races. Driver excludes via merge_cycle until cooldown elapses; label persists as visible history.
Revert PR backing out an invariant violation. Fast-tracked through the merge driver.
Sentinel PR duplicated from upstream into a personal fork by tools/duplicate_prs_to_fork.py for pipeline testing. Lives only in the fork; the canonical pipeline never sees it.
No implementer activity for N days. Flagged for human review. Auto-cleared on next push to head branch.
Repeatedly fails on current master (>= 3 ci-fail-on-rebased-sha releases in 12 h). Excluded from driver until human triage.
A ticket in a blocked state and unable to complete until some other task is completed first.
Bounty
$100
A bounty of $100 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$1000
A bounty of $1000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$10000
A bounty of $10000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$20
A bounty of $20 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$2000
A bounty of $2000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$250
A bounty of $250 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$50
A bounty of $50 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$500
A bounty of $500 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$5000
A bounty of $5000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
Bounty
$750
A bounty of $750 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue
MoSCoW
Could have
Could have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.
MoSCoW
Must have
Must have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.
MoSCoW
Should have
Should have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.
There are questions in the ticket that can not be completed until the project owner provides clarity.
Points
1
1 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
13
13 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
2
2 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
21
21 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
3
3 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
34
34 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
5
5 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
55
55 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
8
8 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Points
88
88 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.
Priority
Backlog
This ticket has backlogged priority and is not to be worked on yet
Priority
CI Blocker
Critical priority issue that blocks CI/CD pipeline and prevents PR merges
Priority
Critical
The priority is critical
Priority
High
The priority is high
Priority
Low
The priority is low
Priority
Medium
The priority is medium
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.
A ticket for learning a tool or technology that is needed to be able to do future planning and design.
State
Completed
The ticket has been fully implemented, completed, and merged with the source code. This label should only be applied once a ticket is closed.
State
Duplicate
A ticket that represents the same content as an existing ticket.
State
In Progress
A ticket that is actively being developed.
State
In Review
A ticket that has had some code completed to implement but is waiting to pass peer review and is not yet merged in.
State
Paused
This ticket's work started but wasn't finished. It's on hold (likely in a feature branch) and will be resumed later, either due to a blocker or a delay.
State
Unverified
All new tickets start in this state. A developer may set it to show the ticket is unverified. This means we haven't agreed to work on it. It will either move to a verified state or be closed as wontdo.
State
Verified
The issue has been verified by a developer as legitimate. It will be worked on and verified tickets are now considered part of the backlog.
State
Wont Do
This ticket has been decided it wont be done. This may mean the bug has been determined to not be real (cant verify) or the feature is one we have decided we dont want to adopt.
Type
Automation
Any edits or discussion about the AI automated coding system.
Type
Bug
Something that doesnt work as intended.
Type
Discussion
Anytime a ticket represents a discussion about a subject and doesnt fall into one of the other categories.
Type
Documentation
An error or improvement needed in the documentation.
Type
Epic
Any first tier epic. That is, an epic which contains only issues as children and will not have sub-epics.
Type
Feature
Some new functionality not present.
Type
Legendary
A type of Epic which will contain other Epics.
Type
Refactor
A code change that restructures existing code without changing its external behavior.
Type
Support
Someone needs help using the project.
Type
Task
A generic task that doesnt fit into the other type categories.
Type
Testing
Work exclusively focusing on fixing or expanding testing.
No Label
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
aditya (Aditya Chhabra)
aleenaumair (Aleena Umair)
brent.edwards (Brent Edwards)
CoreRasurae (Luis Mendes)
drew (Drew Morris)
eugen.thaci (Eugen Thaci)
freemo (Jeffrey Phillips Freeman)
HAL9000 (HAL 9000)
HAL9001 (HAL9001)
hamza.khyari (Hamza Khyari)
hurui200320 (Rui Hu)
justin.morris
khird (Kyle Hird)
org.cleveragents
Clear assignees
No Assignees
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: cleveragents/cleveragents-core#10884
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Delete Branch "fix/ci-coverage-job-ordering"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Summary
unit_teststo theneedslist of thecoveragejob in.forgejo/workflows/ci.ymlneedsline explaining the rationale[Unreleased] > ChangedProblem
The
coveragejob previously only depended on[lint, typecheck, security, quality], allowing it to run in parallel withunit_tests. This caused two issues:Fix
Added
unit_teststo thecoveragejob dependency list. Coverage now only starts after unit tests have passed, ensuring results are always meaningful and eliminating the redundant parallel execution.No circular dependencies are introduced —
status-checkalready depends on bothunit_testsandcoverageindependently.Closes #10714
This PR blocks issue #10714
Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: task-implementor
Review of PR #10884 — fix(ci): add unit_tests to coverage job needs to prevent misleading parallel results
Summary
This is a small but important CI pipeline fix. The
coveragejob was running in parallel withunit_testsbecause it only depended on[lint, typecheck, security, quality]. This caused two problems: (1) coverage could report a pass even when unit tests were still running or had already failed, and (2) both jobs ran the full Behave suite simultaneously, wasting CI runner resources.Evaluation against the 10-category checklist
unit_teststo the coverage job dependencies, exactly as described in issue #10714. The change is minimal and targeted.needsline.Closes #10714keyword present. Dependency direction is correct (PR blocks issue). CHANGELOG updated.CI Status
All CI checks are green (14/14 passing), including unit_tests and coverage — confirming the new dependency ordering works correctly.
Non-blocking note
The PR is missing a
Type/label (the linked issue #10714 hasType/Task). TheType/Tasklabel should be applied to this PR for labeling consistency.Verdict
Approve — the fix is correct, minimal, well-documented, and CI confirms the pipeline works with the new dependency.
Automated PR Review Complete ✅
PR: #10884 — fix(ci): add unit_tests to coverage job needs to prevent misleading parallel results
Review: APPROVED
CI Status: All 14 checks passing
This CI pipeline fix ensures the
coveragejob runs afterunit_testspasses, eliminating misleading parallel results and redundant test execution.Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
Review Summary
PR: fix(ci): add unit_tests to coverage job needs to prevent misleading parallel results
Linked Issue: #10714
What was reviewed
.forgejo/workflows/ci.yml—coveragejobneedslist updated to includeunit_testsCHANGELOG.md— entry under[Unreleased] / Changeddocumenting the changeCategory-by-category results
CORRECTNESS (PASS) — The fix directly addresses issue #10714. Adding
unit_teststocoverage’sneedsensures coverage only runs after unit tests pass. No circular dependency introduced:status-checkalready depends on bothunit_testsandcoverageindependently.SPECIFICATION ALIGNMENT (PASS) — CI workflow configuration change; no spec deviations.
TEST QUALITY (PASS) — CI config changes are validated by CI itself; no test layer needed.
TYPE SAFETY (PASS) — N/A (YAML config, not Python code).
READABILITY (PASS) — Clear rationale comment above the
needsline: "unit_tests is included so coverage only runs after tests pass, preventing misleading results when tests are still in-flight or failing."PERFORMANCE (PASS) — Improvement: eliminates redundant parallel test execution of the full Behave suite.
SECURITY (PASS) — No security concerns.
CODE STYLE (PASS) — Commit follows Conventional Changelog (
fix(ci): ...). Workflow follows project conventions.DOCUMENTATION (PASS) — CHANGELOG updated under
[Unreleased] / Changedwith clear description and issue reference.COMMIT AND PR QUALITY (PASS) — Atomic commit, correct Conventional Changelog format, PR description includes Summary/Problem/Fix structure, dependency direction correct (PR blocks issue #10714).
Conclusion
All 10 categories pass. CI is green. No blocking issues found. Approving.
Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
f881dfbbfdtoc25a6387d0c25a6387d0toeeba1ec640eeba1ec640tobfbe9b27d3No CI checks have been reported for this PR. Per company policy, all CI gates (lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, coverage) must pass before a PR can be approved and merged. Please ensure CI is configured and passing on this branch.
A full code review will be conducted once CI checks are in place.
Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
No CI checks have been reported for this PR. Per company policy, all CI gates (lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, coverage) must pass before a PR can be approved and merged. Please ensure CI is configured and passing on this branch.
A full code review will be conducted once CI checks are in place.
Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker