fix: scope branch-merge and proposed-change-review events to the default branch (closes #9761) by polmichel · Pull Request #10422 · opsmill/infrahub

polmichel · 2026-08-26T11:08:54Z

Why

Webhook branch scoping matches an event against the branch carried on its metadata. Two proposed-change / branch lifecycle events carried the wrong branch there, so branch-scoped webhooks matched them inconsistently:

infrahub.branch.merged was emitted on the global branch, so a Default Branch scoped webhook never matched it while an Other Branches one did, exactly the inverse of infrahub.proposed_change.merged, which is already default-scoped.
infrahub.proposed_change.approved / rejected / approval_revoked / rejection_revoked inherited the branch of the review mutation. They reached the default branch only because the review UI happens to run in the default-branch context — a non-UI client (SDK/REST/automation) reviewing from another branch would emit them on that branch.

Goal: emit both consistently on the default branch so webhook branch scoping is deterministic and client-independent.

Non-goals: the general rule for branch-agnostic node events (#9760) and webhook form validation (#9759). branch.created / branch.deleted carry the same pattern but are intentionally left for #9760.

Future thoughts

Changes related to the global branch are matched by the "All other branches" filter and not by the "Default branch" filter. Events tied to the global branch can be misleading from a user's perspective, since this behavior relies on the fact that some objects are branch-agnostic and others are not. A dedicated "Global branch" filter could be a way to solve this.

Closes #9761

What changed

Behavioral changes:

infrahub.branch.merged is now scoped to the default branch.
The proposed-change review events (approve / reject / cancel-approve / cancel-reject) are now scoped to the default branch server-side, independent of the branch the review mutation ran on.

Implementation notes:

PostMergeDispatcher now stamps the merge event with self.default_branch instead of self.global_branch. The event payload (branch_name, branch_id) still identifies the branch that was merged.
The review mutation resolves the default branch and passes it to EventMeta.from_context(...), so only the event's scoping branch is overridden.

What stayed the same: no schema changes, no GraphQL/REST contract changes, event payloads unchanged.

How to review

backend/infrahub/core/merge/post_merge.py — merge event scoping (one-line change) + dropped global_branch param.
backend/infrahub/graphql/mutations/proposed_change.py — review event scoping override.
backend/infrahub/core/merge/builder.py — wiring updated for the dropped param.
Tests are the largest part of the diff.

How to test

uv run pytest \
  backend/tests/component/core/merge/test_post_merge.py::TestPostMergeBranchMergedEvent \
  "backend/tests/functional/proposed_change/test_review.py::TestProposedChangeReview::test_review_event_scoped_to_default_branch" \
  -v

Impact & rollout

Backward compatibility: infrahub.branch.merged webhook matching changes — a Default-Branch webhook starts matching it and an Other-Branches webhook stops. Documented in the changelog / release notes. Approve/reject scoping is unchanged for UI clients.

Checklist

Tests added/updated
Changelog entry added
External docs updated (if user-facing or ops-facing change)
Internal .md docs updated (internal knowledge and AI code tools knowledge)
I have reviewed AI generated content

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

…ranch Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

cubic-dev-ai

No issues found across 6 files

Confidence score: 5/5

Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
No files require special attention.

_{Shadow auto-approve: would auto-approve. Fixes webhook event scoping: branch-merge and proposed-change review events now carry the default branch as their scoping branch, with tests pinning the behavior and a changelog entry. No contract, schema, or operational tradeoffs exposed in the diff.

Re-trigger cubic}

codspeed-hq · 2026-08-26T11:33:30Z

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 13 untouched benchmarks

_{Comparing ai-bug-pipeline-9761-event-branch-scoping (9bae3f7) with develop (9d38750)}

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

polmichel

I'm not super confident about shipping this behavior change directly in the next minor release, since it changes the branch that some events are tied to. Maybe for this bug we should target develop branch and add a section in the 1.12 release note about this breaking change.
I'll target develop branch for now.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Not all branch-agnostic events are stamped to the default branch: created/deleted stay on the global branch and rebased/migrated inherit the caller's context. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

polmichel · 2026-08-26T14:31:36Z

    from infrahub.database import InfrahubDatabase


+def _build_dispatcher(


extracted as this is now reused in other test classes

polmichel · 2026-08-26T16:07:42Z

+- Proposed change merge and review events (merged, approved, rejected, and the approval/rejection revoke variants) are stamped to the default branch, so scoping is independent of the branch the mutation ran on.
+- `branch.merged` is stamped to the default branch as well, since the merge lands there. Its payload still carries the merged branch in `branch_name` / `branch_id`; only the scoping branch is the default one.
+- `branch.created` and `branch.deleted` are stamped to the global branch, pending a general rule for branch-agnostic node events.
+- `branch.rebased` and `branch.migrated` inherit the caller's context branch; they are not overridden.


I wonder whether it would be relevant to assign the target branch for those operations

gmazoyer · 2026-08-27T08:50:58Z

+            branch=source_branch,
+            proposed_change_id=None,
+            node_events=[],
+            context=_context(default_branch),


Should this be context=_context(source_branch) to validate that the fix works properly?

Yes you're right, thanks @gmazoyer

Run dispatch_events with the source-branch context so the test proves the event is deliberately scoped to the default branch, not merely inheriting it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

cubic-dev-ai

0 issues found across 1 file (changes from recent commits).

Confidence score: 5/5

Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
No files require special attention.

_{Shadow auto-approve: would require human review. Webhook branch scoping change alters which branch-scoped webhooks fire for merge/review events (backward-incompatible), and the delta since the prior decline only tweaks a test, not the substantive behavior.

Re-trigger cubic}

polmichel and others added 7 commits August 26, 2026 11:13

test: add failing test for 9761-event-branch-scoping

8d0b079

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

test: add failing test for review event branch scoping (9761)

d480917

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

fix(events): scope branch-merge and PC-review events to the default b…

8199e31

…ranch Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

style: apply ruff format

78abe0c

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

chore(changelog): add fragment for event branch scoping fix (9761)

0c2612f

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs(events): trim comment

d122260

refactor(merge): drop now-unused global_branch from PostMergeDispatcher

97d3b7b

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

github-actions Bot added the group/backend Issue related to the backend (API Server, Git Agent) label Aug 26, 2026

cubic-dev-ai Bot reviewed Aug 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

docs: document default-branch scoping for branch and PC review events

9f0543a

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

polmichel commented Aug 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

polmichel changed the base branch from stable to develop August 26, 2026 12:45

github-actions Bot added the type/documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Aug 26, 2026

polmichel force-pushed the ai-bug-pipeline-9761-event-branch-scoping branch from f43bffe to 9f0543a Compare August 26, 2026 13:18

polmichel and others added 2 commits August 26, 2026 16:32

docs: reword review-event scoping comment to drop webhook reference

910d4ff

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

polmichel commented Aug 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

polmichel marked this pull request as ready for review August 27, 2026 06:41

polmichel requested review from a team as code owners August 27, 2026 06:41

polmichel requested review from pthmas and removed request for pthmas August 27, 2026 06:41

gmazoyer approved these changes Aug 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

cubic-dev-ai Bot reviewed Aug 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

ogenstad approved these changes Aug 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

polmichel merged commit 580d2e0 into develop Aug 27, 2026
108 of 109 checks passed

polmichel deleted the ai-bug-pipeline-9761-event-branch-scoping branch August 27, 2026 12:24

saltas888 mentioned this pull request Aug 28, 2026

docs: harvest review lessons from PRs reviewed 2026-08-21 to 2026-08-28 #10441

Draft

5 tasks

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

fix: scope branch-merge and proposed-change-review events to the default branch (closes #9761) - #10422

fix: scope branch-merge and proposed-change-review events to the default branch (closes #9761)#10422
polmichel merged 11 commits into
developfrom
ai-bug-pipeline-9761-event-branch-scoping

polmichel commented Aug 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Aug 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

polmichel left a comment •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

polmichel Aug 26, 2026

Uh oh!

polmichel Aug 26, 2026

Uh oh!

gmazoyer Aug 27, 2026

Uh oh!

polmichel Aug 27, 2026

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

		from infrahub.database import InfrahubDatabase


		def _build_dispatcher(

Uh oh!

Conversation

polmichel commented Aug 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Why

Future thoughts

What changed

How to review

How to test

Impact & rollout

Checklist

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq Bot commented Aug 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Uh oh!

polmichel left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

polmichel Aug 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

polmichel Aug 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gmazoyer Aug 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

polmichel Aug 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cubic-dev-ai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

polmichel commented Aug 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq Bot commented Aug 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading

polmichel left a comment •

edited

Loading