test(gitea): add unit tests for parse_payload

[kshitizj03]

📝 Description of the Change

The Gitea provider's parse_payload.go only had direct test coverage for the
issue_comment / pull_request_comment path (TestParsePayloadIssueCommentPullRequestData).
This adds table-driven unit tests for the remaining event handling, following
the structure suggested on the issue:

• TestParsePayloadPullRequest — opened, label_updated, and closed pull
  request payloads, asserting the populated event fields, the
  pull_request_labeled event type, the pull_request_closed trigger target,
  and label extraction.
• TestParsePayloadPush — push payloads with and without a head commit,
  covering the head-commit SHA/URL/title path and the fallback to the before SHA.
• TestParsePayloadErrors — missing event-type header, an event type the
  webhook parser rejects, a parsed event type unsupported by ParsePayload,
  and an invalid JSON body.
• TestPopulateEventFromGiteaPullRequest — direct coverage of the helper
  (nil pull request, fully populated, missing head/base repositories, and the
  missing-SHA case that skips the SHA URL).

A small parseGiteaPayload() test helper builds the request and calls
ParsePayload; the existing test is updated to use it too. No production code
is changed — this is test-only.

🔗 Linked GitHub Issue

Fixes #2146

🧪 Testing Strategy

• Unit tests
• Integration tests
• End-to-end tests
• Manual testing
• Not Applicable

🤖 AI Assistance

• I have not used any AI assistance for this PR.
• I have used AI assistance for this PR.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: kshitizj03 / name: Kshitiz Jain (4ee9c17)

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors the Gitea payload parsing tests in pkg/provider/gitea/parse_payload_test.go by introducing helper functions like parseGiteaPayload and prPayload. It also adds comprehensive new unit tests covering pull requests, push events, error handling, and event population from Gitea pull requests. As there are no review comments, no further feedback is provided.

Important

The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub is being sunset. Starting June 18, 2026, new organization installations will be blocked, and all code review activity will officially cease on July 17, 2026.
For more details on the timeline and next steps, please review the Help Documentation.

[theakshaypant]

Thanks @kshitizj03 for picking this up and nice work on the test coverage! The structure is clean and the core logic paths are well-covered.
Two additional test cases in TestParsePayloadIssueCommentPullRequestData would strengthen this further

• "empty issue URL falls back to PullRequest Index": Sets Issue.URL to "" with a non-nil PullRequest carrying Index: 2787, and asserts PullRequestNumber is 2787, covering the else if gitEvent.PullRequest != nil fallback branch.
• "nil comment skips event type override": Omits the comment field from the payload and asserts that TriggerTarget stays as triggertype.PullRequest without being overridden by opscomments.SetEventTypeAndTargetPR.

[kshitizj03]

Thanks @theakshaypant , added both cases

[kshitizj03]

Thanks @zakisk! Addressed both in ba6432c2: the issue-comment test now asserts EventType (empty for the nil-comment case, retest-all-comment otherwise), and added a synchronized action case to TestParsePayloadPullRequest.

[theakshaypant]

Thanks @kshitizj03 for being patient with the requested changes. One convention that we follow in the repository is to use a single commit per PR. Instead of adding new commits for each round of reviews, could you please amend your initial commit and force push.
This keeps the git history clean and makes it easier for maintainers to review and track changes.

[kshitizj03]

Done. Squashed everything into a single commit. Thanks for the guidance on the repo convention, I'll keep PRs to one commit going forward.

[theakshaypant]

/ok-to-test

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.06%. Comparing base (1c0fabc) to head (30651a6).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2787      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   59.73%   60.06%   +0.32%     
==========================================
  Files         210      210              
  Lines       21117    21117              
==========================================
+ Hits        12615    12683      +68     
+ Misses       7707     7641      -66     
+ Partials      795      793       -2     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.