🐛bugfix for operator-controller not outputting the right commit ID in the version

[rashmigottipati]

Description

The --version doesn't output the source code commit ID. It refers to "vcs-ref" in the image instead of "io.openshift.build.commit.id".

Setting the GIT_COMMIT value to SOURCE_GIT_COMMIT if empty (which is a corresponding downstream variable) will ensure that the version outputs the right commit ID as the code from this repo gets copied to another repo for building purposes.

Reviewer Checklist

• API Go Documentation
• Tests: Unit Tests (and E2E Tests, if appropriate)
• Comprehensive Commit Messages
• Links to related GitHub Issue(s)

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	fcebcb7
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/olmv1/deploys/67c734dba65ef30008400f13
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1811--olmv1.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.45%. Comparing base (c899dc1) to head (fcebcb7).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
internal/shared/version/version.go	0.00%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1811      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.44%   68.45%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          63       63              
  Lines        5134     5136       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         3514     3516       +2     
  Misses       1390     1390              
  Partials      230      230              

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	51.60% <0.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
unit	56.01% <0.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[joelanford]

If this is a downstream-only concern, is it possible to make a change in the downstream repo instead?

I'm kinda curious why the existing upstream implementation doesn't "just work" in downstreams since it should be pulling commit refs for the downstream git repo in the same way.

[rashmigottipati]

@joelanford yeah, this is a downstream only concern. And I think it's fine when we build from the repo downstream too, but it's something to do with the way images get generated using ART. That's when it's using the env var SOURCE_GIT_COMMIT which is the downstream equivalent of GIT_COMMIT.

We can fix this in downstream repo directly as well without fixing it here, but I thought fixing it here and sync'ing it downstream would be better to have both repos as close as possible for maintainability purposes. Let me know if you disagree.

[rashmigottipati]

@camilamacedo86 since we were discussing this on slack, will continue the conversation there to avoid typing in two different places :)

I marked as solved my above comment #1811 (review) to make it easier for the review since we had already sorted out the raised concerns, and we will move with the change for upstream.

[camilamacedo86]

I am OK with 👍

@tmshort WDYT?

[tmshort]

/lgtm