WorkflowDispatchConfig supports multiple yaml node kinds

[pangliang]

I was working on PR go-gitea/gitea#28163 . and found that the workflow.WorkflowDispatchConfig() method cannot be parsed correctly when the yaml node is not a mapping type

on: workflow_dispatch

on: [push, workflow_dispatch]

on:
    - push
    - workflow_dispatch

on:
    push:
    pull_request:
    workflow_dispatch:
        inputs:
            logLevel:
                description: 'Log level'
                required: true
                default: 'warning'
                type: choice
                options:
                - info
                - warning
                - debug

[wolfogre]

Sorry, are you sure your cases are supported by GitHub? Have you tested them?

[pangliang]

Sorry, are you sure your cases are supported by GitHub? Have you tested them?

Yes, github has a special check and does not support nested SequenceNode; but the parsing method supports nesting to be more robust; what do you think?

[wolfogre]

TBH, I don't think it's more robust, it will cause inconsistent behavior. And I don't see any reason why it should support - [pull_request, workflow_dispatch].

[pangliang]

TBH, I don't think it's more robust, it will cause inconsistent behavior. And I don't see any reason why it should support - [pull_request, workflow_dispatch].

I checked the yaml spec, chapter Example 2.5 Sequence of Sequences, The yaml language does have this structure.

So I think this parse method is flow yaml spec, which is better than following the special restrictions of github; especially when this act will be widely used by other gitxxx.

It's just my suggestion, but if you think it's better to follow github, I'll just delete the nested processing part.

[wolfogre]

Please let me clarify, I'm not talking about the yaml specification. Of course, - [pull_request, workflow_dispatch] is supported by yaml, or else you wouldn't be able to parse it with gopkg.in/yaml.v3. I think we are discussing the workflow syntax.

[pangliang]

Okay, here I flow github and add support for the following types:

on: workflow_dispatch

on: [push, workflow_dispatch]

on:
    - push
    - workflow_dispatch

on:
    push:
    pull_request:
    workflow_dispatch:
        inputs:
            logLevel:
                description: 'Log level'
                required: true
                default: 'warning'
                type: choice
                options:
                - info
                - warning
                - debug

[pangliang]

There is another change. When workflow_dispatch is not defined, return nil

on:
    push:

Such cases pre returned non-nil

[mergify]

@pangliang this pull request has failed checks 🛠

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 1026 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (4989f44) 61.22% compared to head (f97f497) 60.91%.
Report is 302 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
pkg/artifactcache/handler.go	65.32%	103 Missing and 43 partials ⚠️
pkg/runner/run_context.go	73.37%	75 Missing and 19 partials ⚠️
pkg/runner/expression.go	55.17%	66 Missing and 12 partials ⚠️
pkg/runner/action_cache.go	50.74%	49 Missing and 17 partials ⚠️
pkg/container/docker_run.go	1.51%	64 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
pkg/container/docker_network.go	0.00%	56 Missing ⚠️
pkg/model/planner.go	28.57%	53 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pkg/model/workflow.go	52.72%	42 Missing and 10 partials ⚠️
pkg/runner/reusable_workflow.go	52.47%	42 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
pkg/common/outbound_ip.go	0.00%	44 Missing ⚠️
... and 27 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2123      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   61.22%   60.91%   -0.31%     
==========================================
  Files          46       53       +7     
  Lines        7141     8988    +1847     
==========================================
+ Hits         4372     5475    +1103     
- Misses       2462     3072     +610     
- Partials      307      441     +134     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[pangliang]

Sorry, I accidentally clicked the 'Re-request review' icon in the 'Reviewers' list of a pull-request page