Chore/bazel build issues elix #2666
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
1week
2weeks
Failed compliance check
IP cameras
NATS
Possible security concern
Review effort 1/5
Review effort 2/5
Review effort 3/5
Review effort 4/5
Review effort 5/5
UI
aardvark
accessibility
amd64
api
arm64
auth
back-end
bgp
blog
bug
build
checkers
ci-cd
cleanup
cnpg
codex
core
dependencies
device-management
documentation
duplicate
dusk
ebpf
enhancement
eta 1d
eta 1hr
eta 3d
eta 3hr
feature
fieldsurvey
github_actions
go
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
javascript
k8s
log-collector
mapper
mtr
needs-triage
netflow
network-sweep
observability
oracle
otel
plug-in
proton
python
question
reddit
redhat
research
rperf
rperf-checker
rust
sdk
security
serviceradar-agent
serviceradar-agent-gateway
serviceradar-web
serviceradar-web-ng
siem
snmp
sysmon
topology
ubiquiti
wasm
wontfix
zen-engine
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
carverauto/serviceradar!2666
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "refs/pull/2666/head"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Imported from GitHub pull request.
Original GitHub pull request: #2288
Original author: @mfreeman451
Original URL: https://github.com/carverauto/serviceradar/pull/2288
Original created: 2026-01-14T08:00:50Z
Original updated: 2026-01-14T08:02:36Z
Original head: carverauto/serviceradar:chore/bazel-build-issues-elix
Original base: staging
Original merged: 2026-01-14T08:02:33Z by @mfreeman451
User description
IMPORTANT: Please sign the Developer Certificate of Origin
Thank you for your contribution to ServiceRadar. Please note, when contributing, the developer must include
a DCO sign-off statement indicating the DCO acceptance in one commit message. Here
is an example DCO Signed-off-by line in a commit message:
Describe your changes
Issue ticket number and link
Code checklist before requesting a review
PR Type
Enhancement, Bug fix
Description
Add missing gRPC service definitions for Elixir monitoring
Fix Bazel build configuration for Elixir releases
Resolve version detection and dependency override issues
Improve Docker Compose documentation and configuration
Diagram Walkthrough
File Walkthrough
2 files
Add missing gRPC service definitionsCreate new Bazel build file for srql6 files
Add dependency override for serviceradar_srqlValidate version against git tagsAdd serviceradar_srql symlink setupAdd missing dependencies to Bazel buildAdd missing dependencies to Bazel buildAdd serviceradar_srql to Bazel dependencies5 files
Add Docker Compose configuration guidanceAdd COMPOSE_FILE environment variable guidanceDocument APP_TAG and COMPOSE_FILE configurationAdd Docker Compose configuration notesImprove Docker setup documentation5 files
Remove obsolete ko build configurationRemove unused OCaml formatter configRemove Elixir-specific compose configurationRemove SPIFFE-based compose configurationRemove testing compose overlayImported GitHub PR comment.
Original author: @qodo-code-review[bot]
Original URL: https://github.com/carverauto/serviceradar/pull/2288#issuecomment-3748295202
Original created: 2026-01-14T08:01:24Z
PR Compliance Guide 🔍
Below is a summary of compliance checks for this PR:
No security concerns identified
No security vulnerabilities detected by AI analysis. Human verification advised for critical code.🎫 No ticket provided
Codebase context is not defined
Follow the guide to enable codebase context checks.
Generic: Comprehensive Audit Trails
Objective: To create a detailed and reliable record of critical system actions for security analysis
and compliance.
Status: Passed
Generic: Meaningful Naming and Self-Documenting Code
Objective: Ensure all identifiers clearly express their purpose and intent, making code
self-documenting
Status: Passed
Generic: Secure Error Handling
Objective: To prevent the leakage of sensitive system information through error messages while
providing sufficient detail for internal debugging.
Status: Passed
Generic: Secure Logging Practices
Objective: To ensure logs are useful for debugging and auditing without exposing sensitive
information like PII, PHI, or cardholder data.
Status: Passed
Generic: Security-First Input Validation and Data Handling
Objective: Ensure all data inputs are validated, sanitized, and handled securely to prevent
vulnerabilities
Status: Passed
Generic: Robust Error Handling and Edge Case Management
Objective: Ensure comprehensive error handling that provides meaningful context and graceful
degradation
Status:
Git failure handling: The new
git tag --points-at HEAD | grep ...pipeline may emit errors or behaveunexpectedly in non-git contexts (or when
gitis unavailable) without a graceful fallbackbeyond setting
version="dev".Referred Code
Compliance status legend
🟢 - Fully Compliant🟡 - Partial Compliant
🔴 - Not Compliant
⚪ - Requires Further Human Verification
🏷️ - Compliance label
Imported GitHub PR comment.
Original author: @qodo-code-review[bot]
Original URL: https://github.com/carverauto/serviceradar/pull/2288#issuecomment-3748296931
Original created: 2026-01-14T08:01:54Z
CI Feedback 🧐
A test triggered by this PR failed. Here is an AI-generated analysis of the failure:
Action: build
Failed stage: Configure SRQL fixture database for tests [❌]
Failed test name: ""
Failure summary:
The action failed during environment/secret validation because the required secret
SRQL_TEST_DATABASE_CA_CERTwas not configured (it is empty in the jobenv), and the workflowrequires it to verify SRQL fixture TLS.
The job aborted with
exit code 1after printing:SRQL_TEST_DATABASE_CA_CERT secret must be configured to verify SRQL fixture TLS.Relevant error logs:
Imported GitHub PR comment.
Original author: @qodo-code-review[bot]
Original URL: https://github.com/carverauto/serviceradar/pull/2288#issuecomment-3748299553
Original created: 2026-01-14T08:02:36Z
PR Code Suggestions ✨
Explore these optional code suggestions:
Clarify the removal of build and compose configurations
Update the PR description to explain the rationale behind removing significant
configuration files, such as
.ko.yamlanddocker-compose.spiffe.yml, anddescribe the new intended approach.
Examples:
docker-compose.spiffe.yml [1-855]
.ko.yaml [1-66]
Solution Walkthrough:
Before:
After:
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9
__
Why: This suggestion correctly identifies a critical omission in the PR, as the removal of core build (
.ko.yaml) and deployment (docker-compose.spiffe.yml) configurations without explanation represents a major, undocumented shift in the project's architecture.Support tags with/without "v"
Modify the git tag check in
workspace_status.shto accept tags with or without a"v" prefix to make version detection more flexible.
scripts/workspace_status.sh [36-40]
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7
__
Why: The suggestion improves the robustness of the version-checking script by correctly handling git tags with or without a 'v' prefix, preventing incorrect "dev" version fallbacks.
Remove unnecessary dependency override
Remove the
override: trueoption from the:serviceradar_srqldependency inweb-ng/mix.exsto improve dependency management and avoid hiding potentialconflicts.
web-ng/mix.exs [47]
Suggestion importance[1-10]: 5
__
Why: The suggestion correctly identifies that using
override: truefor a local path dependency can mask underlying issues and is generally not a best practice, promoting a cleaner dependency tree.