Skip to content

[Maintenance] Validate Sonar administration and continue CI efficiency review #402

Open

Description

@ty-everett

Purpose

This focused successor preserves the optional analysis/CI follow-up from #324 without keeping the completed modernization tracker open. Existing controls remain authoritative while this is evaluated: no new Sonar or CodeQL finding is ignorable, the exact-head repository gate must stay green, and CI speed may not be improved by reducing coverage or quality.

Sonar decision

  • Determine whether SonarCloud Automatic Analysis now provides every capability the repository actually needs alongside Codecov: correct monorepo source/test/generated boundaries, authoritative aggregate and changed-code coverage, exact PR-head attribution, stable required status, fork safety, and no duplicate analysis.
  • If it is equivalent, record evidence and close the administration switch as unnecessary.
  • If it is not equivalent and administration is available, prepare the controlled CI scan using existing aggregate LCOV/report paths, least-privilege token handling, and the precise generated/third-party ownership registry.
  • Disable Automatic Analysis before enabling CI analysis so duplicate scans cannot race or disagree.
  • Validate main and pull-request coverage ingestion, new-code definition, path mapping, fork behavior, check naming, and exact-head zero-finding/hotspot enforcement before changing repository rules.
  • Keep accepted/false-positive new issues and unreviewed hotspots fail-closed under the repository-owned policy regardless of Sonar’s aggregate badge.

CI efficiency

  • Re-measure representative full and targeted cohorts using Actions-supported run, job, step, queue, artifact, and variance data.
  • Do not restore unsupported CPU, memory, or action-internal cache-hit instrumentation; GitHub-hosted Actions APIs do not expose reliable values for those fields.
  • Profile repeated checkout/setup/install/build, artifact transfer, coverage aggregation/upload, browser/mobile, mutation, container, and external-service latency from actual hosted runs.
  • Improve graph-aware scope selection, safe build reuse, deterministic sharding, cache keys, artifact boundaries, and concurrency only where the same assertions, analysis, runtime profiles, and security isolation remain intact.
  • Retain full-fanout triggers for root toolchain, CI orchestration, SDK, governance, coverage, and other changes whose blast radius requires the whole stack.
  • Compare median/p95 and failure/retry behavior against governed baselines; reject optimizations that merely move work outside the measured merge gate or make failures harder to diagnose.
  • Update governance/ci-performance-baseline.json, docs, and workflow comments only from measured evidence.

Exit

Close after the Sonar path has an explicit evidence-backed disposition and the next material CI efficiency review has either landed safe improvements or documented that remaining cost is required. All changed workflow heads must pass the complete exact-head gate, CodeQL, Sonar zero findings/hotspots, and main verification.

Activity

  1. self-assigned this
    on Jul 30, 2026
  2. added
    github_actionsPull requests that update GitHub Actions code
    hardeningReliability, governance, and release hardening
    on Jul 30, 2026
  3. ty-everett commented on Sep 23, 2026

    @ty-everett
    CollaboratorAuthor

    Maintainer disposition: keep open with concrete progress from #559, #560, #562 and #563. Selected main runtime lanes now execute despite skipped PR-only ancestors; manual CI forces the full graph; fork coverage upload and the required status are proven on contributor PRs #550 and #539. The performance collector now paginates bounded cohorts/jobs, deduplicates heads, records partial failures and rejects incomplete baselines. The real infra npm and uv updater groups now pass after the exclusion-schema and uv-bound fixes.

    The recovered historical sample still exceeds July budgets: full median/p95 2,007/2,254 seconds and targeted 566/833 seconds (20 heads per cohort). This is not reported green, and the baseline was not reset. The codec fixture was optimized without changing production bytes, its sequence bound or mutation thresholds. Next compare the fresh full campaign and target-level cost, then separately finish the evidence-backed Sonar administration decision. No coverage gate or security check was removed.

  4. ty-everett commented on Sep 25, 2026

    @ty-everett
    CollaboratorAuthor

    Maintainer CI improvements landed in #624 (merge 429f88f0da1a71f3e5b8ddb2e3d67ee7af2fdcd7), with exact PR and main CI/CodeQL green:

    • Run mandatory Sonar concurrently with build/test work; its zero-new-findings/hotspots policy still gates merge.
    • Give packed artifacts, documentation examples and license/supply-chain checks a separate required lane after the shared build.
    • Split the long Wallet Toolbox HTTP synchronization suite into independently required 0 ms and 1,000 ms delay lanes, keeping the same cases and assertions; four ordinary coverage shards remain.
    • Keep repository-owned 90% patch coverage mandatory. Move external Codecov reporting off the required path and remove only the duplicate codecov/patch requirement from ruleset 19713320. Other required checks, strict freshness and review policies are unchanged.

    Observed required merge feedback was 1,018 seconds for the preceding #617 run versus 604 seconds for #624; the longest wallet lane went from 612 seconds to 357 seconds. These are individual runs with different scopes/runner conditions, not a new median/p95 baseline or a claim that the historical performance program is complete. The final #625 run also passed all required checks under the new layout, including both HTTP lanes and packed/browser/mobile consumers.

    Keeping this issue open for the remaining representative cohort measurements and explicit Sonar automatic-analysis versus CI-analysis decision. No analyzer suppressions, accepted findings, lowered coverage targets, dropped test cases or baseline resets were introduced.

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

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

github_actionsPull requests that update GitHub Actions codehardeningReliability, governance, and release hardening

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions