[steps] Support local composite functions in hook steps - #4062
Merged
sswrk merged 5 commits intoJul 30, 2026
Conversation
This was referenced Jul 23, 2026
Member
Author
This was referenced Jul 23, 2026
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4062 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 62.32% 62.32% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 995 995
Lines 44923 44933 +10
Branches 9440 9443 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 27992 28002 +10
Misses 15483 15483
Partials 1448 1448 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 23, 2026 16:17
ccd27cf to
88b25ed
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
2 times, most recently
from
July 23, 2026 17:06
e118ae0 to
5a88848
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 23, 2026 17:06
88b25ed to
afe2ad9
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 24, 2026 11:43
afe2ad9 to
de031b5
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
2 times, most recently
from
July 24, 2026 11:49
642f105 to
40b60f7
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
2 times, most recently
from
July 24, 2026 12:31
73ece96 to
be7ec02
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
2 times, most recently
from
July 24, 2026 13:02
fd5922a to
44fec11
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
2 times, most recently
from
July 24, 2026 14:12
0236cea to
f14d4f6
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 24, 2026 14:12
44fec11 to
56907d3
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 24, 2026 14:40
f14d4f6 to
fb5d85f
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 24, 2026 14:41
56907d3 to
a107305
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 24, 2026 14:59
fb5d85f to
0a629b7
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 24, 2026 14:59
a107305 to
95e91de
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 24, 2026 15:16
0a629b7 to
32f79bd
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 28, 2026 12:58
336986e to
bfe042d
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 28, 2026 12:58
98ef96f to
ff9cb50
Compare
Member
Author
|
@hSATAC Thank you for noting that, and yes, this was done like that for the sake of consistency. But taking a step back, as a user I'd expect composite functions/function groups to fast-fail within them even in the Corrected the behavior for both composite functions and function groups. |
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 28, 2026 13:11
ff9cb50 to
4a56ee2
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 28, 2026 15:30
bfe042d to
c692851
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 28, 2026 15:30
4a56ee2 to
70ce854
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 29, 2026 09:01
c692851 to
f9f51cc
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 29, 2026 09:01
70ce854 to
3702906
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 29, 2026 09:26
f9f51cc to
e693624
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 29, 2026 09:27
3702906 to
7136a56
Compare
hSATAC
approved these changes
Jul 30, 2026
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
from
July 30, 2026 15:09
e693624 to
b7cdc4d
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 30, 2026 15:09
72786a9 to
87f0562
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
branch
2 times, most recently
from
July 30, 2026 15:33
30c602c to
3b7eed6
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 30, 2026 15:33
87f0562 to
fc23482
Compare
sswrk
changed the base branch from
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-unify-no-if-gating-policy
to
graphite-base/4062
July 30, 2026 15:42
…er hooks, but continue after hook execution after entry failure
sswrk
force-pushed
the
graphite-base/4062
branch
from
July 30, 2026 15:42
3b7eed6 to
ee03114
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 30, 2026 15:42
fc23482 to
b14106c
Compare
sswrk
force-pushed
the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
from
July 30, 2026 15:43
b14106c to
e260a74
Compare
|
⏩ The changelog entry check has been skipped since the "no changelog" label is present. |
sswrk
deleted the
szymonswierk/eng-22387-steps-composite-functions-in-hooks
branch
July 30, 2026 16:11
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.

Why
Hook steps currently reject
uses: ./...local composite functions. Users should be able to reuse the same composites in hooks as in the main workflow.How
A composite function used in a hook is expanded into its inner steps at parse time, the same way it is in the main workflow, and the whole expansion becomes a single hook entry. The step's
if:gates the expansion as a whole.Hook construction now takes a catalog of composite functions. Without it, referencing a composite fails with a missing-function error instead of the previous "not supported in hooks" error.
Wiring reading the composite functions files will be added in follow-up PRs in the stack.
Test Plan
Added unit tests.