Add support for matching PipelineRuns to Pull Request labels

[chmouel]

Implement annotation-based PipelineRun label matching functionality:

• Add pipelinesascode.tekton.dev/on-label annotation for label-based PipelineRun triggers
• Support label matching on GitHub, Gitea, and GitLab providers
• Implement immediate PipelineRun triggering when labels are added
• Enable re-triggering of PipelineRuns on commit updates with existing labels
• Provide access to Pull Request labels via {{ pull_request_labels }} dynamic variable

Supported providers:

• GitHub
• Gitea
• GitLab

Limitations:

• Not supported on Bitbucket Cloud and Bitbucket Server

Demo:

2024-12-11.16-48-26.mp4

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SRVKP-5950

Changes

Submitter Checklist

• 📝 Please ensure your commit message is clear and informative. For guidance on crafting effective commit messages, refer to the How to write a git commit message guide. We prefer the commit message to be included in the PR body itself rather than a link to an external website (ie: Jira ticket).

• ♽ Before submitting a PR, run make test lint to avoid unnecessary CI processing. For an even more efficient workflow, consider installing pre-commit and running pre-commit install in the root of this repository.

• ✨ We use linters to maintain clean and consistent code. Please ensure you've run make lint before submitting a PR. Some linters offer a --fix mode, which can be executed with the command make fix-linters (ensure markdownlint and golangci-lint tools are installed first).

• 📖 If you're introducing a user-facing feature or changing existing behavior, please ensure it's properly documented.

• 🧪 While 100% coverage isn't a requirement, we encourage unit tests for any code changes where possible.

• 🎁 If feasible, please check if an end-to-end test can be added. See README for more details.

• 🔎 If there's any flakiness in the CI tests, don't necessarily ignore it. It's better to address the issue before merging, or provide a valid reason to bypass it if fixing isn't possible (e.g., token rate limitations).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 62.63736% with 34 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 65.64%. Comparing base (0315a46) to head (cb6e218).
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/matcher/annotation_matcher.go	68.42%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pkg/provider/gitea/parse_payload.go	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
pkg/provider/github/parse_payload.go	0.00%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pkg/provider/gitlab/parse_payload.go	40.00%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pkg/provider/gitlab/gitlab.go	20.00%	2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pkg/provider/github/github.go	0.00%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
pkg/provider/github/status.go	57.14%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1854      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   65.74%   65.64%   -0.11%     
==========================================
  Files         178      178              
  Lines       13840    13889      +49     
==========================================
+ Hits         9099     9117      +18     
- Misses       4126     4148      +22     
- Partials      615      624       +9     

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

[chmouel]

/test go-testing

[chmouel]

/test go-testing

[zakisk]

@chmouel I've copied same PR that you're using in video example but in output I'm getting:

Labels on PR: 
{{
labels
}}

[chmouel]

Yeah I need to update the video😅 it's called pull_requests_labels now since can only apply there , see the doc and e2e

[chmouel]

/retest

[zakisk]

@chmouel now I see

Labels on PR: 
bug

[chmouel]

Is it a question ?@zakisk

[zakisk]

@chmouel No, just saying that I am able to print labels with pull_request_labels variabl.

[chmouel]

only add the support_matrix documentation tag, merging it due of @zakisk previous review