Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add option for commit status check #825

Open
ebickle opened this issue Aug 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Add option for commit status check #825

ebickle opened this issue Aug 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request Stale

Comments

@ebickle
Copy link
Contributor

ebickle commented Aug 30, 2024

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I'd like the dependency review action to have an option to create a commit status check to indicate the success or failure of the dependency review independently from the status of the workflow itself.

This would allow the dependency review action to work similarly to CodeQL - the success of the action itself would be (optionally) independent from the "dependency failures", allowing developers to enforce that dependency review is "run" but still have granular control over whether or not the dependency check "report" itself is enforced. This would be a more involved PR, so I'd like to do it after the 'quick fix' to comment-summary-in-pr: on-failure.

Describe the solution you'd like
Add an optional input parameter for dependency-review-action to enable the creation of a commit status check:

  • If no dependency issues are found or warn-only: true is set, the commit state will be set to success.
  • If dependency issues are found and warn-only: false (or the default) is set, the commit state will be set to 'failure'.
  • The target_url of the commit status will point at the workflow run containing the action. This allows users to easily navigate to a full dependency report.
  • Commit status checks should be used instead of check runs because check runs only offer support for GitHub Applications. Creating a check run from a workflow action can result in the check run being randomly attached to a different workflow since all workflows get grouped together into the same check suite.

Describe alternatives you've considered

  • Leaving the required workflow in Evaluate mode and setting warn-only: false. This would make it impossible to enforce a requirement to address vulnerable dependencies without also enforcing the workflow running. At an enterprise-level it would be a negative user experience if pull requests were blocked due to a workflow failure (edge case).
  • Set warn-only: true on shared required workflow. Setting this value wouldn't allow repository administrators to opt-in to enforcing that dependency review problems be addressed in pull requests

Additional context
This issue was created to separate out discussion from #817 (comment)

Copy link

👋 This issue has been marked as stale because it has been open with no activity for 180 days. You can: comment on the issue or remove the stale label to hold stalebot off for a while, add the Keep label to hold stale off permanently, or do nothing. If you do nothing, this issue will be closed eventually by the stalebot. Please see CONTRIBUTING.md for more policy details.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Feb 27, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request Stale
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant