Added Mode::EXECUTABLE flag to gradlew files

[gmazzo]

What are you trying to accomplish?

After #13579, we realised that the executable mode of gradlew was lost when dependabot updates the Gradle Wrapper binaries:

/Users/runner/work/_temp/9c8c4b16-87e9-4ad9-aa50-8fd0b4f2ccd7.sh: line 1: ./gradlew: Permission denied

https://github.com/gmazzo/gradle-codeowners-plugin/actions/runs/19988292200/job/57325370740?pr=251#step:4:21

Smoke tests PR: https://github.com/gmazzo/gradle-codeowners-plugin/pull/251/files

Anything you want to highlight for special attention from reviewers?

I'm assuming that setting file.mode = Mode.EXECUTABLE will be propagated to the PR creation, but needs validation from mantainers.

How will you know you've accomplished your goal?

Since I can't run (or don't know how) to run dependabot locally to open real PRs, I rely on smoke tests to validate the change.

The run with dependabot test reveals that now a new mode: 100755 is added into the output YAML:

Checklist

• I have run the complete test suite to ensure all tests and linters pass.
• I have thoroughly tested my code changes to ensure they work as expected, including adding additional tests for new functionality.
• I have written clear and descriptive commit messages.
• I have provided a detailed description of the changes in the pull request, including the problem it addresses, how it fixes the problem, and any relevant details about the implementation.
• I have ensured that the code is well-documented and easy to understand.

[yeikel]

Thanks!

[yeikel]

@kbukum1 Could you please review this?

[kbukum1]

@gmazzo , sorry for late review. I just saw that in the smoke test the mode is getting updated and accordingly content is getting removed. When we update gradle wrapper and create PR, don't we need also gradlew content as well in the PR or we are not sending update for that?

[gmazzo]

Hi @kbukum1!

accordingly content is getting removed.

You mean in the PR diff?

The content of the gradlew was updating already with the previous changes. The issue I spotted now is that the +x flag gests removed with the file update in the PR.

Assuming you are asking about the diff of the smoke tests, the + for the mode: "100755" is for the change in the file attribute that this PR meants to fix.
It's true that there is a - content: "@rem\r\n@rem Copyright 2015 the original author or right after that, but if you take a closer look, that - does not stands for a diff removing, but rather for a YAML entry.

[kbukum1]

Hi @kbukum1!

accordingly content is getting removed.

You mean in the PR diff?

The content of the gradlew was updating already with the previous changes. The issue I spotted now is that the +x flag gests removed with the file update in the PR.

Assuming you are asking about the diff of the smoke tests, the + for the mode: "100755" is for the change in the file attribute that this PR meants to fix. It's true that there is a - content: "@rem\r\n@rem Copyright 2015 the original author or right after that, but if you take a closer look, that - does not stands for a diff removing, but rather for a YAML entry.

Thanks for the reply. I am going to deploy this one with the smoke test then. Let me know if you see any issue.

• Updated gradle-wrapper tests repo and hash smoke-tests#353

[kbukum1]

• Updated gradle-wrapper tests repo and hash smoke-tests#353

@gmazzo , can you check the smoke test. There are some issues with smoke test? I am rerunning it but seems like it will fail?

[kbukum1]

• Updated gradle-wrapper tests repo and hash smoke-tests#353

@gmazzo , can you check the smoke test. There are some issues with smoke test? I am rerunning it but seems like it will fail?

I think it was temporary issue. Now it is passed. Merged smoke test as well.

[yeikel]

Thank you both for your support. We're closer and closer to GA 😀

[gmazzo]

@kbukum1 was it deployed right? I don't think it worked.

I re-runned the PR with @dependabot recreate, and confirmed it used a new image ghcr.io/dependabot/dependabot-updater-gradle:ef68611130da716d4030d17d24042f85bde8e461 (created at 2025-12-16T20:51:14.997328779Z), but still getting the error:
./gradlew: Permission denied

Can you verify with the Eng team if the Mode attribute is supported by the updater proxy internally? I don't think it's getting propagated correcly into the PR

[gmazzo]

Ok, apparenly the issue is when "updaing the PR" but, creaing it from scrach does work as expected! Finally:
gmazzo/gradle-codeowners-plugin#257

Can you verify with the Eng team if the Mode attribute is supported by the updater proxy internally?

@kbukum1 you may wan't to double check the "@dependabot recreate" flow with the team, but I think we are ready to start rolling this out. At least I don't have any pending thinkg to test

[yeikel]

It seems to be working well

yeikel/kafka-ui#281

But I'll do more tests and confirm

[gmazzo]

Hello peeps @kbukum1 @yeikel, what's next steps for this?

[yeikel]

Hello peeps @kbukum1 @yeikel, what's next steps for this?

My understanding is that the next step is to rollout the flag incrementally and ultimately remove the flag.

As this is a beta flag, I do not believe that people can onboard themselves so we'll need to find volunteers and ask @kbukum1 to enable them. The alternative is for @kbukum1 to pick a few gradle repositories from the logs and enable them incrementally

[kbukum1]

Hello peeps @kbukum1 @yeikel, what's next steps for this?

My understanding is that the next step is to rollout the flag incrementally and ultimately remove the flag.

As this is a beta flag, I do not believe that people can onboard themselves so we'll need to find volunteers and ask @kbukum1 to enable them. The alternative is for @kbukum1 to pick a few gradle repositories from the logs and enable them incrementally

@gmazzo , @yeikel sorry for replying late. I will check this on next Tuesday and make plan to rollout the feature flag in the week so we can monitor. I think we can rollout 100% and monitor it 1-2 hours. In mean time, you can check in your repositories. If there is any issue we can turn down the feature flag.

Just as a note, for this, incremential is going to be hard to follow.

[kbukum1]

I will create an issue to do rollout next week.

[yeikel]

It seems that this is not working in some scenarios #14027