Integration Workflow Removal: Lessons Learned

by Mireille Lambert 46 views

Hey guys! Today, let's dive into a situation we had with our integration workflow. We had to remove it, and I wanted to share the story, the struggles, and the lessons we learned. It's a bit of a journey, so grab your favorite beverage and let's get started!

Summary

So, to cut to the chase, the integration workflow (.github/workflows/integration.yml) was removed. Why? Well, it never worked from the moment it was created. Yep, you heard that right. Despite numerous attempts to fix it, we just couldn't get it to play nice. Let's break down what happened.

History of Failures

Initial Problem: The Workflow That Never Passed

Right from the get-go, the integration workflow was a troublemaker. It never passed a single build since its inception. The initial errors we saw were exit code 100 (command not found) and exit code 1 errors, which are pretty generic and unhelpful, right? Digging deeper, we found that the workflow was trying to run tests that simply didn't exist, specifically TestAppIntegration. Imagine trying to run a race with no track – frustrating, to say the least!

My Failed Attempts to Fix It: The Blame Game (Just Kidding!)

Okay, so here’s where I come in. I tried my best to wrangle this workflow into submission, but let's just say it was a learning experience. I made a few attempts, each with its own... unique challenges.

Attempt 1: Go Version Rabbit Hole

In my first attempt, I made a classic mistake: I focused on the wrong thing. I thought the issue might be with the Go version we were using. I went down the rabbit hole of downgrading from Go 1.24 to 1.23, and then, in a moment of optimism, upgraded to 1.25. Spoiler alert: the Go version was never the problem. It was like trying to fix a flat tire by changing the oil – completely unrelated!

I even claimed success at one point, which, in hindsight, was a bit premature. I assumed that because the tests were passing locally, the fix would magically work in our Continuous Integration (CI) environment. Famous last words, right?

Attempt 2: Hunting Non-Existent Tests

Next up, I tackled the issue of the non-existent TestAppIntegration test. I mean, you can't run a test that isn't there, right? I fixed this by removing the reference to it. I also removed the csv-build step, which required Wails, a framework that wasn't even set up in our CI environment. It was like trying to bake a cake without an oven – you're setting yourself up for failure.

Again, I claimed success, thinking I was making progress. And to be fair, these were real issues, but they weren't the root cause. It's like peeling an onion – you might remove a layer, but there are always more underneath!

Attempt 3: The BuildCLI Path Mystery

This time, I thought I was onto something big. I identified that the BuildCLI() function was using relative paths that would fail in the CI environment. It's like giving someone directions that only work if you're standing in the exact same spot – not very helpful!

I modified the function to use a pre-built CLI when available. Locally, the tests passed, and I even saw the reassuring message: "Using pre-built CLI from ../../build/pca". I was so close, I could taste it!

Yet again, I claimed success. Why? Because the local tests genuinely passed. But here's the kicker: I didn't properly verify the CI environment. It's like celebrating a touchdown before you've crossed the goal line – you might look silly if you drop the ball.

Attempt 4: Dependency Drama

My fourth attempt involved a deep dive into dependency issues. I found that the libwebkit2gtk-4.0-dev package installation was failing. This package is related to GUI functionality, which, as it turns out, wasn't even necessary for the core tests we were trying to run.

So, I removed the unnecessary GUI dependencies. And guess what? I claimed success again! I had fixed one error, but in doing so, I revealed even more issues lurking beneath the surface. It was like playing a game of whack-a-mole – you knock one down, and another pops up somewhere else.

The Real Problems: Unmasking the Culprits

After all these attempts, it became clear that we were facing some fundamental challenges. It wasn't just one simple fix; it was a combination of factors that were conspiring against us.

  1. Environment Differences: This was the big one. The CI environment is fundamentally different from our local development setups. It's like trying to drive a car on a road that doesn't exist in your neighborhood – you're going to have a bad time.
  2. Multiple Cascading Failures: Each fix we made revealed new issues underneath. It was like untangling a knot – you might loosen one part, but the knot just shifts somewhere else.
  3. Complex Test Setup: The integration tests were trying to build and run the CLI in ways that worked locally but not in CI. It was like trying to assemble a piece of furniture without the right tools – you might get close, but it's not going to be pretty.
  4. Path and Working Directory Issues: Go tests run from different directories in CI compared to local environments. This seemingly small detail can throw everything off. It's like trying to navigate with a map that's oriented in the wrong direction – you're going to end up lost.

Why I Kept Claiming Success: A Confession

Okay, let's be honest. I claimed success multiple times, and in hindsight, it wasn't the best approach. Here's why I did it:

  1. Local Tests Passed: Every fix I made actually worked locally. This gave me a false sense of security, like thinking you've won the lottery because you have the first few numbers right.
  2. Partial Understanding: I fixed real issues, but I didn't fully grasp the scope of the problems. It's like treating the symptoms of a disease without addressing the underlying cause – you might feel better for a while, but the problem will come back.
  3. Overconfidence: I assumed that if tests passed locally, they should pass in CI. This is a common trap, and I fell right into it. It's like thinking you can win a race just because you're fast in practice – the real race is a different beast.
  4. Poor Analysis: I didn't thoroughly analyze the CI environment differences before claiming fixes would work. This was a crucial mistake. It's like trying to solve a puzzle without looking at all the pieces – you're going to struggle.

Lessons Learned: Wisdom from the Trenches

So, what did we learn from this adventure? Quite a bit, actually. These lessons are now ingrained in our development process, and I hope they can help you too.

  1. CI is not local development: This is the golden rule. What works on your machine might not work in CI. Treat CI as a completely separate environment, because it is.
  2. Test one thing at a time: Our workflow tried to test too many things at once. This made it incredibly difficult to pinpoint the root cause of failures. It's like trying to debug a complex system all at once – you'll end up overwhelmed.
  3. Start simple: We should have started with a minimal working workflow and built up from there. It's like learning to walk before you run – you need to build a solid foundation first.
  4. Verify in CI first: This is crucial. Test changes in a simpler CI setup before claiming success. It's like testing a parachute before you jump out of a plane – you want to make sure it works!

Recommendation: Building a Better Future for Integration Tests

If we need integration tests in the future, we'll definitely approach it differently. Here’s the game plan:

  1. Start with a minimal workflow that just runs ONE simple test. Keep it lean and mean.
  2. Verify it works in CI. This is non-negotiable.
  3. Gradually add complexity. Don't try to boil the ocean all at once.
  4. Keep CLI tests separate from GUI tests. This will help isolate issues.
  5. Use the already-built CLI from make build rather than rebuilding in tests. This will save time and reduce complexity.
  6. Consider using GitHub Actions' built-in testing capabilities rather than custom scripts. They're often more robust and easier to manage.

Current State: Where We Stand Now

As of now, the integration workflow has been removed. But don't worry, the codebase is safe and sound! Our unit tests are still running successfully in the main build workflow. We're not flying completely blind – we just have a clearer view of the path ahead.

Conclusion: The End of a Chapter, the Start of a New One

So, there you have it – the story of our integration workflow removal. It was a bumpy ride, but we learned a lot. We're now better equipped to tackle integration testing in the future. Remember, guys, every failure is a learning opportunity. Keep experimenting, keep learning, and keep building awesome things!

Thanks for reading, and I hope you found this insightful. Until next time, happy coding!