Skip to content

ci: reuse one package and balance test jobs - #734

Open
mldangelo-oai wants to merge 8 commits into
mainfrom
mdangelo/codex/ci-test-pipeline
Open

ci: reuse one package and balance test jobs#734
mldangelo-oai wants to merge 8 commits into
mainfrom
mdangelo/codex/ci-test-pipeline

Conversation

@mldangelo-oai

@mldangelo-oai mldangelo-oai commented Aug 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

CI repeats the same Bun suite across Node versions, rebuilds the package in each lane, and leaves most Windows tests in two large shards. Build one checked archive, keep the full Bun suite on every OS, and use the supported Node matrix for installed-package checks.

Changes

  • Build and inspect one package archive, then use that same artifact throughout the workflow run. Keep native plugin-build tests and the installed CLI, credential-locking, NodeNext, dashboard, MCP, and nested-worker checks.
  • Run three measured file shards on Linux and macOS and seven on Windows. Include new test files automatically and keep the machine-wide PowerShell test serial.
  • Give MCP tests their own required job. Run pytest with four isolated workers, work stealing, and no automatic worker restarts.
  • Keep diagnostic reports optional while preserving the required check names and rejecting failed, canceled, or skipped required jobs in full CI.
  • Keep the async subprocess checks and serializable Python subtest labels without changing their inputs or assertions.
  • Merge current main and refresh all three workflow-file estimates from the merged test-split PR's final successful CI run. Remove the duplicate-file guard: the runner obtains unique entry names from readdir, and the full-inventory tests still verify that every shared file runs exactly once.

Testing

  • On the refreshed branch, 312 focused checks passed across the shard runner, workflow safeguards, CLI launcher, and MCP tool-discovery tests.
  • SDK and MCP type checks, SDK formatting, and git diff --check passed.
  • The updated shard assignments include all 111 shared files exactly once on both Unix and Windows. The optional-report tests retain real passing and failing subprocesses with writable and blocked report directories.
  • The three workflow-file estimates match the Linux JUnit report and Windows test logs from the referenced successful CI run. These are scheduling estimates, not a claim about total CI speedup.

Risk and rollout

No production code changes. Real process, database, filesystem, and installed-package coverage remains intact across the supported platforms. Package artifacts are required and tied to the current workflow run; dependencies are installed separately on each platform.

The sharding helper retains invalid-count checks and tests for complete inventory coverage. The removed duplicate-input test exercised a case that cannot occur with the filesystem inventory. Refresh duration estimates after expensive tests change. MCP timing reports become available when the native MCP runner lands.

Public disclosure review

  • No customer, partner, prospect, or user identities, data, or identifying details are included.
  • No credentials, personal data, private source, scan findings, or nonpublic links or tickets are included.
  • I reviewed the branch name, title, description, commits, changes, comments, logs, screenshots, attachments, and links for public disclosure.

# Conflicts:
#	.github/workflows/node-ci.yml
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/cli-cloud-publish.test.ts
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/cli-dedupe.test.ts
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/cli-publish.test.ts
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/cloud-publish.test.ts
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/component-scan.test.ts
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/publication-integration.test.ts
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/publish.test.ts
#	sdk/typescript/tests-ts/skeleton.test.ts
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Aug 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review Completed 2026-08-29T06:39:59.200239Z 9eb7a47 Manual request
🔒 Security Review Completed 2026-08-29T06:40:34.714565Z 9eb7a47 New commits
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🎉

Reviewed commit: 5a927e12f1

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Can't wait for the next one!

Reviewed commit: cae202f946

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Keep it up!

Reviewed commit: ddae198280

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Can't wait for the next one!

Reviewed commit: 9eb7a47c86

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants