Cicd combined

[aviv1ron1]

No description provided.

[codecov-commenter]

Welcome to Codecov 🎉

Once you merge this PR into your default branch, you're all set! Codecov will compare coverage reports and display results in all future pull requests.

ℹ️ You can also turn on project coverage checks and project coverage reporting on Pull Request comment

Thanks for integrating Codecov - We've got you covered ☂️

[njs2017]

PR Review

Strong infrastructure PR overall — the CI/CD direction looks good and the pre-commit/dev-experience improvements are valuable.

What looks good

• Clear workflow split across CI, DCO, GPU tests, and publish
• Good use of uv and caching
• Nice contributor-experience improvements in CONTRIBUTING.md, CHANGELOG.md, and Makefile targets
• README link fixes and .git-blame-ignore-revs are good cleanup

Requested changes

1. DCO sign-offs
   The PR appears to include commits without DCO sign-off, so the DCO workflow will fail. Please re-sign the branch, e.g.:

   git rebase --signoff origin/main

2. CI coverage gaps
   tests/composer/ and tests/hf/ are excluded from CPU CI, and GPU tests are manual-only. Please document the intended coverage model clearly in the PR / docs so reviewers know which paths are protected automatically vs manually.

3. Custom hook maintenance
   .pre-commit/validate_links.py adds a fair amount of custom validation logic. It would help to add at least basic tests for:

   • ci/check_headers.py
   • ci/add_signoff.py
   • ci/check_dco.py
   • ideally the link/import validator too

Nits

• There is some purely cosmetic churn (newline-only changes like .github/CODEOWNERS, .gitignore)
• A few workflow commands differ in their use of --frozen; worth making that consistent where possible

Overall: good direction, but I’d request the DCO fix and clearer CI/test-coverage expectations before merge.

[antonpibm]

As we squash the commits this wouldn't work for the current PR, we can either (1) squash the commits as part of the changes so that there is a single commit in this PR, (2) after we merge this PR, open a new PR only for the blame ignore with the squash commit

[aviv1ron1]

@antonpibm In that case, I suggest we split this PR into two parts.
First - only the ruff formatting changes - this one needs to be ignored in git blame.
Second - after we merged the first, merge the CICD work - this should not get ignored by git blame since it is authentic development work, and not a reformat.
we can insert also the git blame ignore revs with the new sha after the first pr merge into the second pr.
Technically it is not complicated to aheieve since the reformat commit was the first commit in this branch, so I can easily split it into two.
If you agree, I will do it.

[aviv1ron1]

@antonpibm - ok done. The ruff reformat changes were applied on PR 102 and this PR now contains only the CICD changes with only a few fixes to make sure all the quality checks added by the CICD pass:

src/


src/granite_switch/__init__.py — the only functional source change.
- What: __version__ = "0.1.0" → read from installed package metadata (importlib.metadata.version), with a "0.0.0+unknown" fallback when running from an uninstalled source tree.
- Why: from commit "reflect package version instead of hard coding a version" — supports the new publish.yaml release workflow so the version has a single source of truth (pyproject) instead of drifting from a hardcoded literal.


src/granite_switch/tutorials/*.py (6 files: __init__.py, chroma_loader.py, rag_display.py, utils/__init__.py, utils/hf_helpers.py, vllm_server.py)
- What: each gains a single top line # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0. Nothing else.
- Why: the new check-headers hook/CI job requires every .py to carry the SPDX header; these tutorial files were the only ones missing it, so the gate forced them in.


tests/


tests/composer/test_adapter_loader.py
- What: assert adapters == yaml_adapters → assert sorted(...) == sorted(...), plus an explanatory comment.
- Why: filesystem scan order varies by OS/filesystem; the strict-order assertion was order-dependent and would flake on GitHub runners. Parity here means same set of adapters, not same ordering.


tests/composer/test_save_load_compose.py
- What: adds pytestmark = [pytest.mark.slow, pytest.mark.requires_model].
- Why: the module downloads a base model + RAG adapters and composes a checkpoint — far too heavy for CPU runners. The marks exclude it from CPU CI selection so it runs only on the GPU cluster.


tutorials/ — all pure hygiene, zero content change (verified)


- 8 notebooks (*.ipynb) — nbstripout normalization: source stored as line-lists, metadata/outputs stripped, cell IDs renumbered, trailing newline. I verified the actual cell source is byte-identical to upstream for all 8 — only the JSON serialization format changed.
- 2 sample_run/*.json — trailing newline added by end-of-file-fixer; content confirmed identical modulo whitespace.
- tutorials/README.md — one trailing-space removed.```

[aviv1ron1]

I think this PR is ready for merging

[antonpibm]

Please see the minor comments