discuss: Fix CI build scripts to dynamically detect fork repository names

[vtri950]

The build_iso.sh and kicbase_auto_build.sh scripts were hardcoding
repository names as "minikube", causing failures when contributors
have differently named forks. This change:

• Uses GitHub CLI to dynamically fetch the actual fork repository name
• Adds fallback to "minikube" for backward compatibility
• Includes SSH/HTTPS protocol fallback for better connectivity
• Resolves "Repository not found" errors in CI builds

Fixes issues where PRs from forks like "minikube-fork" would fail
during the automated ISO and kicbase build processes.

Fixes #22018

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: vtri950
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign comradeprogrammer for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @vtri950. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a github.com member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[minikube-bot]

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

[vtri950]

/cc @nirs

[nirs]

@vtri950 cool! can you create another minikube fork for testing this change?

You can test the ISO build by editing a file in deploy/iso - for example adding a comment in on of the configuration files. Building iso should work with a fork name minikube or any other name.

Testing may work without additional change, since this change should trigger an ISO build, but I'm not sure the change detection is correct for build scripts.

[afbjorklund]

I think you can just use refs/pull/123456/head, but there should be GitHub documentation about it

[vtri950]

@vtri950 cool! can you create another minikube fork for testing this change?

Do you want me to create this PR from a different fork(from a different account)?

[nirs]

@vtri950 cool! can you create another minikube fork for testing this change?

Do you want me to create this PR from a different fork(from a different account)?

Yes, we need to test 2 cases:

• fork != minikube: we fixed the bug
• fork == minikube: no regression in common case (forking creates repo with the same name by default)

[vtri950]

• fork != minikube: we fixed the bug

i have changed the name of my existing fork
and pushed a commit (hopefully this will do)

[nirs]

Testing iso build with custom fork name

/ok-to-build-iso

[nirs]

/ok-to-build-iso

[minikube-bot]

Hi @vtri950, we have updated your PR with the reference to newly built ISO. Pull the changes locally if you want to test with them or update your PR further.

[nirs]

@vtri950 iso was built with custom minikube fork name, lets rename the fork to standard name and test again. You can rename the fork and remove the commit added by the bot.

[medyagh]

vtri950 I m curios how are you planning to run the ISO on fork ? where would it push the ISO to ?
and do you plan to have your own jenkins on the Fork?

[vtri950]

@vtri950 iso was built with custom minikube fork name, lets rename the fork to standard name and test again. You can rename the fork and remove the commit added by the bot.

done

[vtri950]

vtri950 I m curios how are you planning to run the ISO on fork ? where would it push the ISO to ? and do you plan to have your own jenkins on the Fork?

@medyagh sorry but i didn't get your question(s), can you pls provide a little more context?

[medyagh]

vtri950 currently those commands ok-to-build.... gets answered by jenkins, (not github actions) how would it work on fork ? do you already have an infrastructure that listens to your Fork ? our jenkins is configured to only build images on this repo not forks...so even if you do all these changes it wont be triggered

plus the script are configured to push the ISO to a GCS bucket in a GCP project, your fork wont have access to that.

so I dont see any usage for this modifcations ever !

[vtri950]

vtri950 currently those commands ok-to-build.... gets answered by jenkins, (not github actions) how would it work on fork ? do you already have an infrastructure that listens to your Fork ? our jenkins is configured to only build images on this repo not forks...so even if you do all these changes it wont be triggered

The iso build fails because of this bug (as mentioned in the issue description) it was detected in #21997

so I dont see any usage for this modifcations ever !

becasue of this i had to change my fork name to the standard (same as standard repo) name as requested by @nirs
in the conversation log of #21997
who suggested i open this issue in first place