GeezerVison

The init step only saves the configuration at the end if otherwise successful, so a failure before that point will mean that no configuration is written to disk. The config?.gitHubVersion.type check in the start-proxy post step will therefore fail and exit after logging "Did not upload debug artifacts because cannot determine the GitHub variant running." and before uploading the proxy log as an artifact.

That's not desirable, because the proxy log may contain information that is relevant to troubleshooting why the init step failed. Furthermore, we don't depend on the gitHubVersion from the config in any case, since we call getGitHubVersion immediately afterwards and use the result of that.

The check was introduced originally in #2482. This PR deletes the config?.gitHubVersion.type check so that proxy logs can be uploaded as artifacts when we are in debug mode even if the init step fails.

As a drive-by improvement, I have also modified getGitHubVersion so that getApiDetails() isn't called twice (once directly and once indirectly by getApiClient).

Risk assessment

For internal use only. Please select the risk level of this change:

• Low risk: Changes are fully under feature flags, or have been fully tested and validated in pre-production environments and are highly observable, or are documentation or test only.

Which use cases does this change impact?

Workflow types:

• Managed - Impacts users with dynamic workflows (Default Setup, Code Quality, ...).

Products:

• Code Scanning - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-scanning.
• Code Quality - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-quality.
• Other first-party - The changes impact other first-party analyses.

Environments:

• Dotcom - Impacts CodeQL workflows on github.com and/or GitHub Enterprise Cloud with Data Residency.
• GHES - Impacts CodeQL workflows on GitHub Enterprise Server.

How did/will you validate this change?

• Unit tests - I am depending on unit test coverage (i.e. tests in .test.ts files).
• End-to-end tests - I am depending on PR checks (i.e. tests in pr-checks).

If something goes wrong after this change is released, what are the mitigation and rollback strategies?

• Rollback - Change can only be disabled by rolling back the release or releasing a new version with a fix.

How will you know if something goes wrong after this change is released?

• Telemetry - I rely on existing telemetry or have made changes to the telemetry.
  • Dashboards - I will watch relevant dashboards for issues after the release. Consider whether this requires this change to be released at a particular time rather than as part of a regular release.
  • Alerts - New or existing monitors will trip if something goes wrong with this change.

Are there any special considerations for merging or releasing this change?

• No special considerations - This change can be merged at any time.

Merge / deployment checklist

• Confirm this change is backwards compatible with existing workflows.
• Consider adding a changelog entry for this change.
• Confirm the readme and docs have been updated if necessary.