test(openfeature): use canonical FFE fixtures

[leoromanovsky]

Motivation

Use the shared FFE fixture corpus. This prevents copied Go fixtures from drifting from other SDKs.

The same migration is merged in Java and libdatadog. Related migrations are open for Python, JavaScript, Ruby, and .NET.

Changes and Decisions

• Add DataDog/ffe-system-test-data as an OpenFeature test submodule.
• Read all canonical configuration and evaluation cases from the submodule.
• Parse and validate flags independently so one invalid flag does not reject valid neighbors.
• Assert canonical values and reasons, including temporal defaults and missing-flag errors.
• Initialize submodules in Go test workflows and configure weekly Dependabot updates.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.46%. Comparing base (8839f29) to head (9de1759).

Additional details and impacted files

see 280 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-07-31 22:23:17

Comparing candidate commit 4868373 in PR branch leo.romanovsky/ffe-canonical-fixtures-20260512 with baseline commit 9873869 in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 326 metrics, 0 unstable metrics, 1 flaky benchmarks without significant changes.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

• 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
• 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

Known flaky benchmarks

These benchmarks are marked as flaky and will not trigger a failure. Modify FLAKY_BENCHMARKS_REGEX to control which benchmarks are marked as flaky.

Known flaky benchmarks without significant changes:

• scenario:BenchmarkOTLPTraceWriterFlush

[datadog-prod-us1-6]

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 96.08%
• Overall Coverage: 63.02% (+11.59%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 4868373 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 9de1759c0e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[kakkoyun]

@leoromanovsky Shall we revive this?

[leoromanovsky]

@leoromanovsky Shall we revive this?

@kakkoyun That sounds great; pushed latest main and resolved conflicts.

[kakkoyun]

LGTM

[sameerank]

Also a recommendation to add submodules: recursive to fetch submodules of this workflow might fail because it runs scripts/ci_test_core.sh, which tests ./... including openfeature.

dd-trace-go/.github/workflows/gotip-testing.yml

Line 39 in d2e5a2f

- name: Checkout

[sameerank]

🙌