[seantronsen]

Description

Note

lint-makefile-common fails until v4.0 is released (see #11).

Testbed for OpenCHAMI/github-actions#51. Converts the testbed into a minimal Fabrica project, so it can test the Fabrica code generation checks: the lint-codegen-fabrica workflow (OpenCHAMI/github-actions#39) and the generate / generate-check targets in Makefile.common (OpenCHAMI/github-actions#48).

• Fabrica v0.4.11, with one Widget resource and file storage. The generated code is in its own commit, separate from the files written by hand.
• The testbed binary is now the Fabrica server (./cmd/server, with serve as the image's default command). It replaces cmd/testbed. Release outputs and package contents are unchanged.
• lint.yml: adds lint-codegen-fabrica to the lint gate, pinned to the fix(workflows): step 9, keep the Fabrica checkout out of generate-check github-actions#51 head.
• go 1.26.10: Fabrica requires at least 1.26.6, which has a standard-library vulnerability reachable from our code (GO-2026-6617).
• The README covers regenerating the code.

Checklist

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have added/updated comments where needed
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or my feature works
• I have run make test (or equivalent) locally and all tests pass
• I have updated the relevant documentation (CLI examples, man pages, README, other docs, etc.)
• DCO Sign-off: All commits are signed off (git commit -s) with my real name and email
• REUSE Compliance:
  • Each new/modified source file has SPDX copyright and license headers
  • Any non-commentable files include a <filename>.license sidecar
  • All referenced licenses are present in the LICENSES/ directory

Type of Change

• Bug fix
• New feature
• Breaking change
• Documentation update
• Dependency update
• Build system/CI

---

• I agree to follow the Code of Conduct.

[synackd]

I see we test the happy path. Do we test that code drift causes this to fail anywhere?

[seantronsen]

I see we test the happy path. Do we test that code drift causes this to fail anywhere?

The recent commit 1af3ff2 will test this explicitly and be dropped after.

[seantronsen]

CI is busted up because all the rebase shenanigans which changed all the sha pins. I'll update this whole sale later so each occurs at the correct position in the stack.

[synackd]

Approving based on scoped changes. Makefile stuff needs to be worked out still but I think this is ready.

[synackd]

OpenCHAMI/github-actions#51 was rebased. Please update the lint-codegen-fabrica uses: pin in .github/workflows/lint.yml from 861e95d552181a730e085f487769f1c66696d813 to its current head, 5465b701d85559086f6a9f5d075f8b5ba81e682f, and rerun lint.

The workflow file is identical at both commits, so the earlier passing generation check and deliberate-drift failure remain valid behavior tests. Updating the pin keeps this testbed tied to the current PR head.