ci: update status when action triggered by issue comment

[richm]

issue comment triggers do not automatically update check status in the PR, so
use separate steps to update them, similar to how the tft.yml workflow works.
For issue comment workflows, ensure that the head_sha is set early in the
workflow and the status is only updated if there is a head_sha.

Create a variable for context so it is created in one place and used in several
places in the workflow.

Ensure that the first steps in the workflow are to get the head_sha and set the
status to In Progress.

Signed-off-by: Rich Megginson rmeggins@redhat.com

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Added pending and final commit status reporting for pull request checks triggered by comments.
  • Statuses now identify the relevant pull request commit and workflow context.
  • Improved checkout behavior to test the correct pull request revision.
  • Preserved clear success reporting for skipped platform-specific integration tests.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Team

Run ID: 73c3770b-ff30-4cf6-9173-18e6e609edc4

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 75e1f4e and ef40dca.

📒 Files selected for processing (9)

• .github/workflows/ansible-lint.yml
• .github/workflows/ansible-managed-var-comment.yml
• .github/workflows/ansible-test.yml
• .github/workflows/codespell.yml
• .github/workflows/markdownlint.yml
• .github/workflows/qemu-kvm-integration-tests.yml
• .github/workflows/test_converting_readme.yml
• .github/workflows/tft.yml
• .github/workflows/woke.yml

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Changes

The workflows now resolve pull request head SHAs and status contexts for issue_comment runs. They publish pending statuses before execution and final statuses after execution. They also grant statuses: write permission and update checkout references.

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to ef40d

Issue-comment workflows now publish pending and final commit statuses using resolved PR head SHAs, with guarded completion updates. The changed workflows are ready to merge with no identified production risk.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description Format	⚠️ Warning	The PR description does not follow the required template. The repository template requires Enhancement:, Reason:, and Result: sections. The description contains none of these labels. If treated …	Rewrite the PR description with the required labeled sections. For this behavior fix, use Cause:, Consequences:, Fix:, and Result:, retain the Signed-off-by: line, and add the optional issue or assistant sections only if applicabl…

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title follows Conventional Commits format with the valid ci type and clearly describes the workflow status updates for issue-comment triggers.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description clearly explains the reason and intended result of the changes. It does not use the template headings or explicitly state the enhancement and issue-tracker status, but the required inf…
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Full details: Description check

Explanation

The description clearly explains the reason and intended result of the changes. It does not use the template headings or explicitly state the enhancement and issue-tracker status, but the required information is mostly present.

Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (9 skipped: 9 unsupported.)

Full details: Description Format

Explanation

The PR description does not follow the required template. The repository template requires Enhancement:, Reason:, and Result: sections. The description contains none of these labels. If treated as a bug fix, it also lacks the required Cause:, Consequences:, Fix:, and Result: sections. It does include a valid Signed-off-by: Rich Megginson <rmeggins@redhat.com> line.

Resolution

Rewrite the PR description with the required labeled sections. For this behavior fix, use Cause:, Consequences:, Fix:, and Result:, retain the Signed-off-by: line, and add the optional issue or assistant sections only if applicable.

• Fix all pre-merge checks with AI

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}