infra/ansible
22
7
Fork 57
Code Pull requests 7 Activity Actions

migrate openshift-apps to use openshift/app-actions #3459

Merged
smoliicek merged 49 commits from smoliicek/ansible:ocp-migrate/batch into main 2026-07-09 19:09:27 +00:00
Conversation 8 Commits 49 Files changed 78 +355 -1291
smoliicek commented 2026-06-29 20:39:57 +00:00
Member
Copy link
No description provided. 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
add openshift/app-actions to cloud-image-uploader
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Successful in 28s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m11s
Details
dd32638ca7
 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
add openshift/app-actions to coreos-koji-tagger
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Successful in 27s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m50s
Details
6e1401652f
 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
smoliicek force-pushed ocp-migrate/batch from 6e1401652f
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Successful in 27s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m50s
Details
to 7d5d2c4874
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Failing after 36s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m37s
Details
AI Code Review / ai-review (pull_request_target) Failing after 7s
Details
2026-07-01 21:10:48 +00:00 Compare 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
add openshift/app-actions to websites
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Failing after 42s
Details
AI Code Review / ai-review (pull_request_target) Successful in 21s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m20s
Details
10a35bc7bc
 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
smoliicek changed title from WIP: migrate openshift-apps to use openshift/app-actions to migrate openshift-apps to use openshift/app-actions 2026-07-08 11:41:18 +00:00
forgejo-actions commented 2026-07-08 11:41:49 +00:00
Copy link

AI Code Review

Detailed Code Review

The migration to the openshift/app-actions role has been executed consistently across all application playbooks. The refactoring successfully reduces boilerplate code and consolidates the build and deployment actions into a single role call.

No security issues, logic errors, or performance bottlenecks were identified. The use of loops and conditionals (like environment-specific deployments in fmn.yml and koschei.yml) has been accurately translated to the new role structure.

✅ Summary

  • Overall Assessment: The migration is clean, consistent, and introduces no critical issues. The code is ready for merging.

🤖 AI Code Review | Generated with ai-code-review | Model: gemini-3.1-pro-preview

⚠️ AI-generated suggestions may be incorrect. Verify before applying. Not a replacement for human review.

## AI Code Review ### Detailed Code Review The migration to the `openshift/app-actions` role has been executed consistently across all application playbooks. The refactoring successfully reduces boilerplate code and consolidates the build and deployment actions into a single role call. No security issues, logic errors, or performance bottlenecks were identified. The use of loops and conditionals (like environment-specific deployments in `fmn.yml` and `koschei.yml`) has been accurately translated to the new role structure. ### ✅ Summary - **Overall Assessment:** The migration is clean, consistent, and introduces no critical issues. The code is ready for merging. --- 🤖 **AI Code Review** | Generated with [ai-code-review](https://gitlab.com/redhat/edge/ci-cd/ai-code-review) | **Model:** `gemini-3.1-pro-preview` ⚠️ *AI-generated suggestions may be incorrect. Verify before applying. Not a replacement for human review.*
remove trailing spaces in fmn
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Failing after 30s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m5s
Details
0b19b5b754
 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
smoliicek commented 2026-07-08 11:51:31 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

only thing that changed how the playbook runs is in websites.yml, the build now requires the build tag passed, noted by a comment in the playbook

edit: confirmed with darknao that this shouldn't affect anything

only thing that changed how the playbook runs is in `websites.yml`, the build now requires the build tag passed, noted by a comment in the playbook edit: confirmed with darknao that this shouldn't affect anything
kevin commented 2026-07-08 20:16:07 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

This is a pretty massive pr. ;)

The yamllint is fun, it's failing due to missing --- at the top... but also, it needs to be changed too?
ie, can you fix that and add jira-sync.yml here?

This is a pretty massive pr. ;) The yamllint is fun, it's failing due to missing --- at the top... but also, it needs to be changed too? ie, can you fix that and add jira-sync.yml here? 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
remove awx & test-auth
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Failing after 31s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 3m1s
Details
5592141c76
 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
smoliicek commented 2026-07-08 21:05:06 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

i swear the yamllint returned all okay on my machine

i swear the yamllint returned all okay on my machine
fix all yaml-lint errors
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Successful in 31s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 2m12s
Details
bb0cd3e8ca
 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
smoliicek commented 2026-07-08 21:09:25 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

okay, yamllint stuff fixed + deleted awx and test-auth while i was at it

okay, yamllint stuff fixed + deleted awx and test-auth while i was at it
fix the conflict in zabbix-proxy
Some checks failed
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Successful in 32s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m25s
Details
AI Code Review / ai-review (pull_request_target) Successful in 24s
Details
6ca182e952
 
Signed-off-by: Vít Smolík <me@smoliicek.cz>
kevin commented 2026-07-09 18:08:24 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

ok, it looks reasonable to me now.

This is a massive 78 commits. Should we squash it into one big one?

ok, it looks reasonable to me now. This is a massive 78 commits. Should we squash it into one big one?
smoliicek commented 2026-07-09 18:29:34 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

yeah, i think that is reasonable

yeah, i think that is reasonable
forgejo-actions commented 2026-07-09 18:31:12 +00:00
Copy link

AI Code Review

Detailed Code Review

The migration from individual openshift/start-build and openshift/rollout roles to the unified openshift/app-actions role is executed cleanly across multiple playbooks. The removal of the awx and test-auth components aligns with the documented intentions, and previous yaml linting issues appear to be addressed. The conditional usage of the new role (e.g., in poddlers.yml and staging environments) is well-handled. No critical security or logic issues were found during the review.

✅ Summary

  • Overall Assessment: Review completed successfully. No critical bugs or security risks were identified in the migration to the new openshift/app-actions role.

🤖 AI Code Review | Generated with ai-code-review | Model: gemini-3.1-pro-preview

⚠️ AI-generated suggestions may be incorrect. Verify before applying. Not a replacement for human review.

## AI Code Review ### Detailed Code Review The migration from individual `openshift/start-build` and `openshift/rollout` roles to the unified `openshift/app-actions` role is executed cleanly across multiple playbooks. The removal of the `awx` and `test-auth` components aligns with the documented intentions, and previous yaml linting issues appear to be addressed. The conditional usage of the new role (e.g., in `poddlers.yml` and staging environments) is well-handled. No critical security or logic issues were found during the review. ### ✅ Summary - **Overall Assessment:** Review completed successfully. No critical bugs or security risks were identified in the migration to the new openshift/app-actions role. --- 🤖 **AI Code Review** | Generated with [ai-code-review](https://gitlab.com/redhat/edge/ci-cd/ai-code-review) | **Model:** `gemini-3.1-pro-preview` ⚠️ *AI-generated suggestions may be incorrect. Verify before applying. Not a replacement for human review.*
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels   
ai-review-please
label for requesting AI code review

  
freeze-break-request

   
post-freeze
  
Backlog Status
Needs Review
 Work items that have been created or updated but need review, refinement, or approval before they can be considered ready for sprint planning.

  
Backlog Status
Ready
 Work items that have been reviewed, refined, and are ready to be committed to a sprint. These items have clear requirements and can be worked on immediately when capacity is available.

  
chore
Work that needs to be done but doesn't add new functionality or fix bugs. Maintenance tasks that keep the system running smoothly and the codebase clean.

  
documentation
Work focused on creating, updating, or improving documentation for users, developers, or system administrators.

  
points
01
 A task that is simple, small, and has very little uncertainty. It should be easy enough for any team member to pick up and complete quickly, without a lot of discussion or research.

  
points
02
 This is a task that is slightly more complex or larger than a "1." It might involve two or three simple steps, but the outcome is still very clear and there's little uncertainty.

  
points
03
 Medium-sized task with some noticeable complexity. It might require a bit more thought or collaboration. The steps are well-defined, but it's not a trivial change.

  
points
05
 A significant piece of work. It has more complexity and a higher degree of uncertainty than smaller tasks. It might require some research, a design discussion, or collaboration across multiple teams.

  
points
08
 Complex task with a lot of uncertainty. It's often the largest size that a team will consider for a single sprint. It likely requires a detailed breakdown and multiple team members to complete.

  
points
13
 Any task that feels like it's a "13" or more is considered an Epic. These are too large and uncertain to be worked on in a single sprint and should be broken down.

  
Priority
High
 This is for work that is critical and needs to be addressed in the next sprint. It's often for urgent bugs, important features, or a major piece of technical debt that is blocking other work.

  
Priority
Low
 This is for work that is good to do but not urgent. It's a candidate for being worked on when there's extra time or when it rises in importance. It can stay in the backlog for a longer period.

  
Priority
Medium
 This is for important work that should be done soon, but isn't as urgent as a high-priority item. It will likely be considered for the next 1-2 sprints.

  
Sprint Status
Blocked
 Work items that cannot progress due to external dependencies, blockers, or issues that need resolution.

  
Sprint Status
Done
 Work items that have been completed, reviewed, and integrated. No further work is needed within the current sprint.

  
Sprint Status
In Progress
 Work items currently being worked on by a team member. Active development, research, or implementation is happening.

  
Sprint Status
Review
 Work items that are complete but need review, testing, or approval before being marked as done.

  
Sprint Status
To Do
 Work items that are committed to the sprint but haven't been started yet. These items are ready to be picked up by team members.

  
Technical Debt
Work that addresses shortcuts, workarounds, or suboptimal implementations that were done previously to meet deadlines. These items improve code quality, maintainability, or performance without adding new features.

  
Work Item
Bug
 Issues where the system is not working as intended or designed. Bugs represent deviations from expected behavior.

  
Work Item
Epic
 Large initiatives that are broken down into multiple smaller work items (user stories, tasks, bugs). Epics represent significant features or projects that span multiple sprints.

  
Work Item
Spike
 Time-boxed research, investigation, or proof-of-concept work to reduce uncertainty or explore solutions. Spikes help inform future development decisions.

  
Work Item
Task
 Used to break down larger user stories into smaller, manageable implementation pieces. They focus on the specific technical steps needed to deliver the user story's value.

  
Work Item
User Story
 User-facing features or functionality that can be framed from a user perspective, describing what someone wants to accomplish and why.

No labels
ai-review-please
freeze-break-request
post-freeze
Backlog Status
Needs Review
Backlog Status
Ready
chore
documentation
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Sprint Status
Blocked
Sprint Status
Done
Sprint Status
In Progress
Sprint Status
Review
Sprint Status
To Do
Technical Debt
Work Item
Bug
Work Item
Epic
Work Item
Spike
Work Item
Task
Work Item
User Story
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
infra/ansible!3459
No description provided.