Skip to content

DEV-3480: Include Stack Name with Workflow Errors #1372

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 17, 2025
Merged

DEV-3480: Include Stack Name with Workflow Errors #1372

merged 3 commits into from
Jul 17, 2025

Conversation

milldr
Copy link
Member

@milldr milldr commented Jul 17, 2025 •
edited by coderabbitai bot
Loading

what

  • Added the stack name to the workflow error message

why

  • When a workflow with the stack as an input fails, the stack needs to be included in the error message

references

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Improved error messages for failed workflow steps now include the stack context in suggested commands, making it easier to resume or diagnose failures.
    • Added a new workflow designed to demonstrate failure scenarios involving stack parameters.
  • Tests
    • Added test cases to verify error handling when workflows fail with stack parameters, including command-line stack overrides.
    • Updated test outputs and error snapshots to reflect enhanced error messages and new workflow availability.

@milldr milldr added the minor New features that do not break anything label Jul 17, 2025
@milldr milldr requested a review from a team as a code owner July 17, 2025 18:03
@github-actions github-actions bot added the size/s Small size PR label Jul 17, 2025
@coderabbitai coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes update workflow error handling to ensure the stack parameter is included in error and resume commands when a workflow step fails. New tests and snapshots are added to verify that the error output correctly reflects the stack context in both the failed command and the suggested resume command.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
internal/exec/workflow_utils.go Refactored error handling to always append -s <stack> to failed and resume commands if set.
internal/exec/workflow_test.go Added tests for workflow failure with stack parameter and stack override via CLI argument.
tests/fixtures/scenarios/workflows/stacks/workflows/test.yaml Added a new workflow fail-with-stack with a stack parameter and a failing command.
tests/snapshots/TestCLICommands_atmos_workflow_failure_with_stack.stderr.golden Added new snapshot for workflow failure error output with stack context.
tests/snapshots/TestCLICommands_atmos_workflow_not_found.stderr.golden Updated available workflows list to include fail-with-stack.
tests/test-cases/workflows.yaml Added test case for workflow failure with stack, checking error output for correct stack context.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant User
    participant CLI
    participant WorkflowEngine

    User->>CLI: Run workflow with stack (e.g., fail-with-stack -s prod)
    CLI->>WorkflowEngine: Execute workflow step
    WorkflowEngine-->>CLI: Step fails
    CLI->>User: Output error message with failed command (includes -s prod)
    CLI->>User: Output resume command (includes -s prod)
Loading

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Include stack in error message for failed workflows (DEV-3480) ✅

Suggested labels

patch

Suggested reviewers

  • osterman
📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5ac7861 and 10cf705.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • internal/exec/workflow_test.go (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (2)
**/*.go

Instructions used from:

Sources:
📄 CodeRabbit Inference Engine

  • .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc
**/*_test.go

Instructions used from:

Sources:
📄 CodeRabbit Inference Engine

  • .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc
🧠 Learnings (2)
📓 Common learnings 
Learnt from: CR
PR: cloudposse/atmos#0
File: .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-07-01T02:22:25.901Z
Learning: Clearly describe the changes in the PR description

Learnt from: Listener430
PR: cloudposse/atmos#934
File: tests/fixtures/scenarios/docs-generate/README.md.gotmpl:99-118
Timestamp: 2025-01-25T03:51:57.689Z
Learning: For the cloudposse/atmos repository, changes to template contents should be handled in dedicated PRs and are typically considered out of scope for PRs focused on other objectives.

Learnt from: CR
PR: cloudposse/atmos#0
File: .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-07-01T02:22:25.901Z
Learning: Reference any related issues in the PR description

Learnt from: milldr
PR: cloudposse/atmos#1229
File: internal/exec/workflow_test.go:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-06-02T14:12:02.710Z
Learning: In the atmos codebase, workflow error handling was refactored to use `PrintErrorMarkdown` followed by returning specific error variables (like `ErrWorkflowNoSteps`, `ErrInvalidFromStep`, `ErrInvalidWorkflowStepType`, `ErrWorkflowStepFailed`) instead of `PrintErrorMarkdownAndExit`. This pattern allows proper error testing without the function terminating the process with `os.Exit`, enabling unit tests to assert on error conditions while maintaining excellent user-facing error formatting.

Learnt from: aknysh
PR: cloudposse/atmos#944
File: go.mod:206-206
Timestamp: 2025-01-17T00:18:57.769Z
Learning: For indirect dependencies with license compliance issues in the cloudposse/atmos repository, the team prefers to handle them in follow-up PRs rather than blocking the current changes, as these issues often require deeper investigation of the dependency tree.

Learnt from: milldr
PR: cloudposse/atmos#1229
File: internal/exec/workflow_test.go:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-06-02T14:12:02.710Z
Learning: In the atmos codebase, workflow error handling was refactored to use `PrintErrorMarkdown` followed by returning the error instead of `PrintErrorMarkdownAndExit`. This pattern allows proper error testing without the function terminating the process with `os.Exit`, enabling unit tests to assert on error conditions.

Learnt from: Listener430
PR: cloudposse/atmos#1061
File: tests/snapshots/TestCLICommands_atmos_vendor_pull_ssh.stderr.golden:8-8
Timestamp: 2025-02-14T23:12:38.030Z
Learning: Test snapshots in the Atmos project, particularly for dry run scenarios, may be updated during the development process, and temporary inconsistencies in their content should not be flagged as issues.
internal/exec/workflow_test.go (16) 
Learnt from: milldr
PR: cloudposse/atmos#1229
File: internal/exec/workflow_test.go:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-06-02T14:12:02.710Z
Learning: In the atmos codebase, workflow error handling was refactored to use `PrintErrorMarkdown` followed by returning specific error variables (like `ErrWorkflowNoSteps`, `ErrInvalidFromStep`, `ErrInvalidWorkflowStepType`, `ErrWorkflowStepFailed`) instead of `PrintErrorMarkdownAndExit`. This pattern allows proper error testing without the function terminating the process with `os.Exit`, enabling unit tests to assert on error conditions while maintaining excellent user-facing error formatting.

Learnt from: milldr
PR: cloudposse/atmos#1229
File: internal/exec/workflow_test.go:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-06-02T14:12:02.710Z
Learning: In the atmos codebase, workflow error handling was refactored to use `PrintErrorMarkdown` followed by returning the error instead of `PrintErrorMarkdownAndExit`. This pattern allows proper error testing without the function terminating the process with `os.Exit`, enabling unit tests to assert on error conditions.

Learnt from: aknysh
PR: cloudposse/atmos#759
File: internal/exec/terraform.go:366-368
Timestamp: 2024-11-02T15:35:09.958Z
Learning: In `internal/exec/terraform.go`, the workspace cleaning code under both the general execution path and within the `case "init":` block is intentionally duplicated because the code execution paths are different. The `.terraform/environment` file should be deleted before executing `terraform init` in both scenarios to ensure a clean state.

Learnt from: Cerebrovinny
PR: cloudposse/atmos#764
File: internal/exec/describe_stacks.go:289-295
Timestamp: 2024-11-13T21:37:07.852Z
Learning: In the `internal/exec/describe_stacks.go` file of the `atmos` project written in Go, avoid extracting the stack name handling logic into a helper function within the `ExecuteDescribeStacks` method, even if the logic appears duplicated.

Learnt from: Listener430
PR: cloudposse/atmos#825
File: internal/exec/helmfile_generate_varfile.go:28-31
Timestamp: 2024-12-07T16:16:13.038Z
Learning: In `internal/exec/helmfile_generate_varfile.go`, the `--help` command (`./atmos helmfile generate varfile --help`) works correctly without requiring stack configurations, and the only change needed was to make `ProcessCommandLineArgs` exportable by capitalizing its name.

Learnt from: CR
PR: cloudposse/atmos#0
File: .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-07-01T02:22:25.901Z
Learning: Applies to **/*_test.go : Include integration tests for command flows

Learnt from: CR
PR: cloudposse/atmos#0
File: .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-07-01T02:22:25.901Z
Learning: Applies to **/*_test.go : Test both happy paths and error conditions

Learnt from: haitham911
PR: cloudposse/atmos#727
File: internal/exec/terraform_clean.go:407-416
Timestamp: 2024-11-24T19:13:10.287Z
Learning: In `internal/exec/terraform_clean.go`, when `getStackTerraformStateFolder` returns an error in the `handleCleanSubCommand` function, the error is logged, and the process continues without returning the error.

Learnt from: aknysh
PR: cloudposse/atmos#825
File: internal/exec/terraform.go:30-30
Timestamp: 2024-12-07T16:19:01.683Z
Learning: In `internal/exec/terraform.go`, skipping stack validation when help flags are present is not necessary.

Learnt from: aknysh
PR: cloudposse/atmos#775
File: internal/exec/template_funcs_component.go:157-159
Timestamp: 2024-11-12T03:16:02.910Z
Learning: In the Go code for `componentFunc` in `internal/exec/template_funcs_component.go`, the function `cleanTerraformWorkspace` does not return errors, and it's acceptable if the file does not exist. Therefore, error handling for `cleanTerraformWorkspace` is not needed.

Learnt from: CR
PR: cloudposse/atmos#0
File: .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-07-01T02:22:25.901Z
Learning: Applies to **/*_test.go : Use table-driven tests for testing multiple scenarios

Learnt from: CR
PR: cloudposse/atmos#0
File: .cursor/rules/atmos-rules.mdc:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-07-01T02:22:25.901Z
Learning: Applies to **/*_test.go : Use test fixtures for complex inputs

Learnt from: samtholiya
PR: cloudposse/atmos#1255
File: cmd/describe_affected_test.go:15-15
Timestamp: 2025-05-23T19:51:47.091Z
Learning: The atmos codebase has a custom extension to *testing.T that provides a Chdir method, allowing test functions to call t.Chdir() to change working directories during tests. This is used consistently across test files in the codebase.

Learnt from: osterman
PR: cloudposse/atmos#740
File: cmd/cmd_utils.go:340-359
Timestamp: 2024-10-23T21:36:40.262Z
Learning: In the Go codebase for Atmos, when reviewing functions like `checkAtmosConfig` in `cmd/cmd_utils.go`, avoid suggesting refactoring to return errors instead of calling `os.Exit` if such changes would significantly increase the scope due to the need to update multiple call sites.

Learnt from: aknysh
PR: cloudposse/atmos#810
File: examples/tests/stacks/catalog/terraform/template-functions-test2/defaults.yaml:28-32
Timestamp: 2024-12-01T00:33:20.298Z
Learning: In `examples/tests/stacks/catalog/terraform/template-functions-test2/defaults.yaml`, `!exec atmos terraform output` is used in examples to demonstrate its usage, even though `!terraform.output` is the recommended approach according to the documentation.

Learnt from: samtholiya
PR: cloudposse/atmos#914
File: cmd/validate_stacks.go:20-23
Timestamp: 2025-01-09T22:27:25.538Z
Learning: The validate commands in Atmos can have different help handling implementations. Specifically, validate_component.go and validate_stacks.go are designed to handle help requests differently, with validate_stacks.go including positional argument checks while validate_component.go does not.
🧬 Code Graph Analysis (1)
internal/exec/workflow_test.go (1)
pkg/schema/schema.go (3)
  • WorkflowDefinition (525-529)
  • WorkflowStep (518-523)
  • Command (599-609)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (5)
  • GitHub Check: Build (windows-latest, windows)
  • GitHub Check: Lint (golangci)
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (go)
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (javascript-typescript)
  • GitHub Check: Summary
🔇 Additional comments (2)
internal/exec/workflow_test.go (2)

170-189: Test case looks good and follows established patterns.

The new test case properly validates workflow failure scenarios when a stack is defined at the workflow level. The use of a non-existent stack "idontexist" is appropriate for triggering the error condition.

190-209: Test case correctly validates command line stack override scenario.

This test case appropriately covers the scenario where a command line stack override is provided but the actual command still references a non-existent stack, ensuring the error handling works in both stack configuration contexts.

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch DEV-3480/workflow-errors-with-stack

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai auto-generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary or @auto-summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai or @auto-title anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

coderabbitai[bot]
coderabbitai bot previously approved these changes Jul 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 53.91%. Comparing base (6c15c52) to head (10cf705).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1372      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   53.81%   53.91%   +0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         251      251              
  Lines       26863    26870       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits        14456    14487      +31     
+ Misses      10707    10682      -25     
- Partials     1700     1701       +1
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 53.91% <100.00%> (+0.10%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@github-actions github-actions bot added size/m Medium size PR and removed size/s Small size PR labels Jul 17, 2025
@aknysh aknysh added no-release Do not create a new release (wait for additional code changes) and removed minor New features that do not break anything labels Jul 17, 2025
@aknysh aknysh merged commit 1bdb728 into main Jul 17, 2025
65 checks passed
@aknysh aknysh deleted the DEV-3480/workflow-errors-with-stack branch July 17, 2025 19:04
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link

These changes were released in v1.183.0.

This was referenced Aug 15, 2025
Merged
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@osterman osterman osterman approved these changes

@aknysh aknysh aknysh approved these changes

@coderabbitai coderabbitai[bot] coderabbitai[bot] approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
no-release Do not create a new release (wait for additional code changes) size/m Medium size PR
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@milldr @osterman @aknysh