Skip to content

Use setup-codeql logic for finding release assets in start-proxy - #4198

Open
mbg wants to merge 9 commits into
mainfrom
mbg/start-proxy/deprecate-fallback
Open

mbg wants to merge 9 commits into
mainfrom
mbg/start-proxy/deprecate-fallback

Conversation

@mbg

@mbg mbg commented Oct 6, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

The start-proxy Action currently uses its own getReleaseByVersion function to get hold of the release that we expect to find the proxy assets at. That function has hard-coded owner and repo values for the default github/codeql-action repository. This repository may not be available in all environments. In such environments, getReleaseByVersion fails and we fall-back to the hard-coded release obtained from getFallbackUrl instead.

Broadly, this PR does the following:

  • getCodeQLActionRepository and getCodeQLBundleDownloadURL are refactored out of setup-codeql into a new setup/repository module.
  • We then use getCodeQLAssetDownloadURL (renamed from getCodeQLBundleDownloadURL) in the start-proxy action to apply the same logic for finding a suitable release as used by setup-codeql.
  • The hard-coded fallback has been removed. The default URL returned by getCodeQLBundleDownloadURL is essentially equivalent, except that it uses the linked version rather than a hard-coded one. We have been shipping proxy artifacts successfully with releases for a good while now, so the fallback shouldn't be needed anymore.

There are some drive-by improvements to logging and assertions for sinon stubs.

Risk assessment

For internal use only. Please select the risk level of this change:

  • Low risk: Changes are fully under feature flags, or have been fully tested and validated in pre-production environments and are highly observable, or are documentation or test only.

Which use cases does this change impact?

Workflow types:

  • Managed - Impacts users with dynamic workflows (Default Setup, Code Quality, ...).

Products:

  • Code Scanning - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-scanning.
  • Code Quality - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-quality.
  • Other first-party - The changes impact other first-party analyses.

Environments:

  • Dotcom - Impacts CodeQL workflows on github.com and/or GitHub Enterprise Cloud with Data Residency.
  • GHES - Impacts CodeQL workflows on GitHub Enterprise Server.

How did/will you validate this change?

  • Unit tests - I am depending on unit test coverage (i.e. tests in .test.ts files).
  • End-to-end tests - I am depending on PR checks (i.e. tests in pr-checks).

If something goes wrong after this change is released, what are the mitigation and rollback strategies?

  • Rollback - Change can only be disabled by rolling back the release or releasing a new version with a fix.

How will you know if something goes wrong after this change is released?

  • Telemetry - I rely on existing telemetry or have made changes to the telemetry.
    • Dashboards - I will watch relevant dashboards for issues after the release. Consider whether this requires this change to be released at a particular time rather than as part of a regular release.
    • Alerts - New or existing monitors will trip if something goes wrong with this change.

Are there any special considerations for merging or releasing this change?

  • No special considerations - This change can be merged at any time.

Merge / deployment checklist

  • Confirm this change is backwards compatible with existing workflows.
  • Consider adding a changelog entry for this change.
  • Confirm the readme and docs have been updated if necessary.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the size/L May be hard to review label Oct 6, 2026
@mbg
mbg force-pushed the mbg/start-proxy/deprecate-fallback branch from 362e7d4 to cd87ccd Compare October 6, 2026 15:56
@mbg
mbg force-pushed the mbg/start-proxy/deprecate-fallback branch from cd87ccd to 133ffeb Compare October 6, 2026 16:10
@mbg
mbg marked this pull request as ready for review October 6, 2026 16:12
@mbg
mbg requested a review from a team as a code owner October 6, 2026 16:12
@mbg
mbg requested review from henrymercer and a balanced review from Copilot October 6, 2026 16:12

This comment was marked as outdated.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added size/XL May be very hard to review and removed size/L May be hard to review labels Oct 6, 2026

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/XL May be very hard to review

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants