Skip to content

CI failures refactor#61

Merged
mdtux89 merged 7 commits intomainfrom
marco_ci_failures
Feb 2, 2026
Merged

CI failures refactor#61
mdtux89 merged 7 commits intomainfrom
marco_ci_failures

Conversation

@mdtux89
Copy link
Collaborator

@mdtux89 mdtux89 commented Feb 2, 2026

No description provided.

@junie-github-actions
Copy link

junie-github-actions bot commented Feb 2, 2026

Junie successfully finished!
PR link: #62


export const CODE_REVIEW_TRIGGER_PHRASE_REGEXP = new RegExp(CODE_REVIEW_ACTION, 'i')

export const FIX_CI_ACTION = "fix-ci";

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Documentation Updated

The new fix-ci trigger phrase has been documented in:

  • COOKBOOK.md: Added as Option A (recommended) with built-in prompt usage, similar to the code-review pattern
  • README.md: Added to the prompt input description to inform users about this special value

This feature allows users to trigger CI failure analysis in three ways:

  1. Using prompt: "fix-ci" in workflows
  2. Commenting @junie-agent fix-ci on PRs
  3. Automatically on workflow_run failure events

Review PR diff and update README documentation

Co-authored-by: mdtux89 <1517735+mdtux89@users.noreply.github.com>
nikitaBarkov and others added 4 commits February 2, 2026 15:12
[Junie]: Review PR diff and update README documentation
# Conflicts:
#	src/github/context.ts
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 2, 2026

Junie successfully finished!

Result: Analyze and Suggest Fixes for CI Failures

CI Failure Analysis for marco_ci_failures Branch

Summary

The CI workflow failed due to a pre-existing test issue in test/comment-feedback.test.ts. The test file itself is not part of the PR changes, but the test suite execution revealed a missing mock configuration.


Root Cause

Test Failure: TypeError: undefined is not an object (evaluating 'octokit.rest.reactions.createForIssueComment')

Location: test/comment-feedback.test.ts (lines 31-44)

Issue: The mock Octokit object is missing the reactions API, which is required by the addThumbsUpToTriggerComment function in src/github/operations/comments/feedback.ts.

The function attempts to call:

  • octokit.rest.reactions.createForIssueComment (line 72)
  • octokit.rest.reactions.createForPullRequestReviewComment (lines 57, 82)

Since the mock object only includes issues and pulls APIs, accessing reactions returns undefined, causing the TypeError.


Suggested Fix

File: test/comment-feedback.test.ts

Lines 31-44: Add the missing reactions API to the mock Octokit object:

mockOctokit = {
  rest: {
    issues: {
      createComment: mock(async () => ({ data: { id: 12345 } })),
      updateComment: mock(async () => ({ data: { id: 12345 } })),
      listComments: mock(async () => ({ data: [] })),
    },
    pulls: {
      createReplyForReviewComment: mock(async () => ({ data: { id: 67890 } })),
      updateReviewComment: mock(async () => ({ data: { id: 67890 } })),
      listReviewComments: mock(async () => ({ data: [] })),
    },
    reactions: {
      createForIssueComment: mock(async () => ({ data: { id: 1, content: '+1' } })),
      createForPullRequestReviewComment: mock(async () => ({ data: { id: 2, content: '+1' } })),
    },
  },
} as any;

What to add: Insert the reactions object (lines 13-16 above) after the pulls object and before the closing brace.


Additional Context

  • PR Changes: The PR modifies src/github/context.ts, src/github/junie/junie-tasks.ts, test/junie-tasks.test.ts, and documentation files
  • Test File Status: test/comment-feedback.test.ts is NOT part of the PR changes
  • Impact: This is a pre-existing test infrastructure issue that needs to be fixed separately
  • All Other Tests: Passing successfully (permissions, graphql-data-fetcher, trigger-validation, jira-json-parser, actor, format-summary tests all pass)

The fix is straightforward: add the two missing mock methods to the reactions API object in the test setup.

@mdtux89 mdtux89 merged commit e65c37d into main Feb 2, 2026
2 checks passed
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.

3 participants