[PM-29913] ci: Fix release notes fetch failure while creating GitHub Releases #6282
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6282 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 85.53% 85.51% -0.03%
==========================================
Files 761 762 +1
Lines 54522 54530 +8
Branches 7833 7833
==========================================
- Hits 46636 46630 -6
- Misses 5169 5183 +14
Partials 2717 2717 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
Great job! No new security vulnerabilities introduced in this pull request |
|
Claude finished @vvolkgang's task in 1m 52s —— View job Code Review CompleteThe review has identified findings that need attention before merge. SummaryThis PR successfully fixes the Jira field name issue and adds excellent logging improvements. However, there's a documentation-code mismatch that should be corrected. Key Findings❌ Critical: Documentation-Code Mismatch
❓ Question: Python Command Change
Positive Aspects✅ Excellent logging improvements with Recommendation: Fix the documentation mismatch before merge. The field name in README.md should match the actual field used in the script ( |
![claude[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1236702?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| echo "Getting product release notes..." | ||
| # capture output and exit code so this step continues even if we can't retrieve release notes. | ||
| script_exit_code=0 | ||
| product_release_notes=$(python .github/scripts/jira-get-release-notes/jira_release_notes.py "$_RELEASE_TICKET_ID" "$_JIRA_API_EMAIL" "$_JIRA_API_TOKEN") || script_exit_code=$? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❓ Question: Python Command Change
The command changed from python3 to python. Both should work in modern Ubuntu environments, but was this change intentional or incidental?
The test runs show it works correctly, but it's worth documenting the reason if this was a deliberate change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
⛏️ I think this is actually a good callout. @vvolkgang I'm assuming this was intentional, so can we mention it in the PR description?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Saw something from BRE changing it elsewhere (which I'm not finding now 🤦🏾 ) and followed the lead as it works either way given the versions installed in our runner images, and I didn't have a good enough reason to have it as python3 in the first place other than shenanigans with my local setup at the time.
🎟️ Tracking
PM-29913
📔 Objective
While creating a GitHub Release, our workflow started to fail to retrieve release notes. This happened because the ticket field name changed after the ticket type structure was recently updated.
As part of this PR we're fixing the issue by updating the field name and improving logging in case something similar happens again. Script was non intentionally executed with
python3instead ofpython, changed it based on internal suggestion without any specific reason other.Test runs:
⏰ Reminders before review
🦮 Reviewer guidelines
:+1:) or similar for great changes:memo:) or ℹ️ (:information_source:) for notes or general info:question:) for questions:thinking:) or 💭 (:thought_balloon:) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmed issue and could potentially benefit from discussion:art:) for suggestions / improvements:x:) or:warning:) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention:seedling:) or ♻️ (:recycle:) for future improvements or indications of technical debt:pick:) for minor or nitpick changes