Skip to content

Conversation

@betulependule
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #2786

RELEASE NOTES BEGIN

Packit Service dashboard now includes a link to OpenScanHub results.

RELEASE NOTES END

@usercont-release-bot
Copy link

usercont-release-bot commented Nov 7, 2025

Preview: https://packit-dashboard-pr-516.surge.sh (deployed at Tue 25 Nov 2025, 08:08 UTC)

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

Copy link
Collaborator

@Venefilyn Venefilyn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@majamassarini are we meant to continue returning .js format from the DB for the scan results URL? Or could we update the DB to return only .html as we only really use it here still? Unless there are more consumers of the Packit API that I'm not aware of. Currently we get this from the OSH API:

"scan_results_url": "http://openscanhub.fedoraproject.org/task/80669/log/python-specfile-0.37.1.post1.dev11+gd2bb6c5-1.20251107112836473283.pr496.11.gd2bb6c5/scan-results.js?format=raw",

Otherwise, implementation LGTM. Only thing I'd suggest is putting the href replacement outside of the return to make it clearer we're changing the value, but it's small enough that it is mostly fine.

Smaller screens is manageable too. Note for future changes: it's getting to the point where we need to consider a visual restructure to make it work on smaller screens
image

Unrelated to the PR but related for OSH: As for OSH results, what value does this provide to the user? Looking at this it seems confusing when there are no findings for the scan as it only shows RAW metadata
https://openscanhub.fedoraproject.org/task/80669/log/python-specfile-0.37.1.post1.dev11+gd2bb6c5-1.20251107112836473283.pr496.11.gd2bb6c5/scan-results.html

scan: "OpenScanHub task",
newFindings: "New findings",
scan: "OpenScanHub Task",
scanResults: "OpenScanHub Results",

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shall it be replaced with "Full scan results"? This is the term we use among OpenScanHub contributors, but may be there could be a different way to tell an average user about the difference between new findings and full scan results.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you mean replacing the "OpenScanHub Results" header with "Full Scan Results"? Though removing the OpenScanHub keyword from the header might be a little inconsistent with the "OpenScanHub Task" header. Maybe we could do:

"OpenScanHub Results" ----> "Full Scan Results"
"OpenScanHub Task" ----> "Task"

I'm not sure if there are better headings that we could use.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

To be consistent with the keywords we can use the words "All Findings" and "New Findings". You can probably leave "OpenScanHub Task" as it is. Thanks!

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

timeProcessed: "Time Processed",
scan: "OpenScanHub Task",
scanResults: "OpenScanHub Results",
scanResults: "All Findings",

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shall scanResults be replaced with allFindings? But it is hidden from the user and may need to be changed at other places too, if that is the case you do not have to change it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good point. scanResults is just the name of the column and isn't used in any other file, so I think it makes sense to name it allFindings for consistency.

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

@siteshwar
Copy link

I am not familiar with the code, but it looks good from a high level. Thanks!

@betulependule
Copy link
Contributor Author

betulependule commented Nov 12, 2025

Shall I squash all commits into one before merging? Also could someone please double check that the code added in this commit is ok? I'm new to Typescript, so I wouldn't want to merge something that could potentially have weird side effects.

Copy link
Collaborator

@Venefilyn Venefilyn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd suggest we use a function to modify the URL instead of modifying the whole dataset that we get

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

@betulependule
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you all for your help with this. If you have any comments and concerns, let me know until this Wednesday (26th). I plan to squash this to a single commit and merge on Thursday otherwise.

@Venefilyn
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you all for your help with this. If you have any comments and concerns, let me know until this Wednesday (26th). I plan to squash this to a single commit and merge on Thursday otherwise.

I don't know the backend here enough but code itself looks fine. As the self-designated front-end expert for Packit it's fine. @siteshwar if it's good to you then I'm for merging

@siteshwar
Copy link

@siteshwar if it's good to you then I'm for merging

Please go ahead with merging. Thanks!

@Venefilyn Venefilyn enabled auto-merge November 24, 2025 13:51
@Venefilyn Venefilyn disabled auto-merge November 24, 2025 13:51
A new column has been added to the OSH dashboard, which contains
the link to OSH results. Columns have been resized appropriately
and column headers have been capitalized for consistency.
@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

@betulependule betulependule added the mergeit Merge via Zuul label Nov 25, 2025
@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

Build succeeded (gate pipeline).
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/13bc23e1b65342f2a99d3c4d877cbefb

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 30s

@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request merge failed: Merge commits are not allowed on this repository.

@betulependule betulependule added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 25, 2025
Merged via the queue into packit:main with commit 51e4c2b Nov 25, 2025
6 checks passed
@betulependule betulependule deleted the osh_scan_results branch November 25, 2025 08:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

mergeit Merge via Zuul

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add a link to full OpenScanHub results to dashboard

4 participants