[env_op_images] Fix expected_pull_basis for direct mirror URLs

[nemarjan]

The pulled-images report template only checked image references against source registry prefixes from ICSP/IDMS rules. Images already referencing a mirror URL directly (e.g. registry.stage instead of registry.redhat.io) were misclassified as "source". Add a second-pass check against mirror prefixes so these images are correctly labelled expected_pull_basis: mirror.

[openshift-ci]

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

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

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

Details

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

[nemarjan]

The pulled-images report template only matched image references against source registry prefixes (e.g. registry.redhat.io) from ICSP/IDMS mirror rules. When an image already referenced a mirror URL directly (e.g. registry.stage.redhat.io), the startswith check against the source prefix failed because the strings differ at character 10 (s vs r). This caused the image to be incorrectly labelled expected_pull_basis: source even though it was on a known mirror. The fix adds a fallback check against mirror prefixes so these images are correctly labelled mirror.

[evallesp]

LGTM, Can we make a test that covers this? So we don't eventually makes a regression?

[michburk]

/lgtm

I agree with @evallesp that some molecule tests would be good here, but considering this is a bug fix and the other core functionality of this feature isn't being tested with molecule yet, I'm ok with merging this after just seeing the testproject results.

I think a complete suite of molecule tests would be a good follow-up patch, but adding that here and now as part of this patch feels a little outside of the scope of these changes.

Open to disagreement!

[Valkyrie00]

Implementation looks good to me. Regarding test, I agree with you both, but one thought for a potential follow-up. If we want to add coverage down the road, we could convert it into a Python module (following the verify_pulled_report_crio pattern) so it can be unit-tested via ansible-test. Not a blocker, just flagging it as something we could track as a separate task.

For the moment, I'm ok with this change, so I've approved it 👍

cc: @evallesp @michburk @nemarjan