fix(cli): consistent output format, sorted findings, version flag

- Workflow rules now use strict if: evaluation (parse failure → skip rule,
  not match); fixes premature matching that blocked later rules and injected
  wrong variables into the context
- Single = accepted as alias for == in rules:if: expressions
- File/Line preserved through extends: resolution (lost during YAML
  encode/decode round-trip in the resolver)
- Findings sorted by (File, Line, Rule) so same-file issues group together
- All warnings use ruff-style path: [warning] message format (includes,
  extends chains, workflow non-start)
- Add --version / -v flag; version shown at top of every --help output
- Build injects version via ldflags using git describe

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

internal/cicontext/eval.go

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ import (
 //   - Variable references: $VAR_NAME or ${VAR_NAME}
 //   - String literals:     "value" or 'value'
 //   - Null keyword:        null
-//   - Comparison:          == != =~ !~
+//   - Comparison:          == != =~ !~  (single = is accepted as == for user convenience)
 //   - Boolean:             && || !
 //   - Grouping:            ( )
 //   - Regex flags:         /pattern/i (case-insensitive), /pattern/m, /pattern/s
@@ -23,10 +23,21 @@ import (
 // used by GitLab CI. Unsupported or unparseable expressions fall back to true
 // (permissive) so the linter never silently drops jobs it cannot evaluate.
 func EvalIf(expr string, vars func(string) string) bool {
+	return evalIf(expr, vars, true)
+}
+
+// EvalIfStrict is like EvalIf but returns false (instead of true) when the
+// expression cannot be fully parsed. Use for workflow:rules: evaluation where
+// a failed parse should skip to the next rule rather than matching everything.
+func EvalIfStrict(expr string, vars func(string) string) bool {
+	return evalIf(expr, vars, false)
+}
+
+func evalIf(expr string, vars func(string) string, permissive bool) bool {
 	p := &exprParser{s: strings.TrimSpace(expr), vars: vars}
 	result, ok := p.parseOr()
 	if !ok || p.pos < len(p.s) {
-		return true // unparseable → permissive
+		return permissive
 	}
 	return result
 }
@@ -200,6 +211,17 @@ func (p *exprParser) parseComparison() (bool, bool) {
 			return true, true // bad pattern → permissive
 		}
 		return !re.MatchString(leftStr), true
+
+	// Single = not followed by = or ~ — accepted as == (common user mistake;
+	// GitLab CI only supports == but = is frequently written by accident).
+	case p.peek() == '=' && !p.startsWith("==") && !p.startsWith("=~"):
+		p.pos++ // consume '='
+		p.skipWS()
+		rightStr, ok := p.parseValue()
+		if !ok {
+			return false, false
+		}
+		return leftStr == rightStr, true
 	}
 
 	// No operator: variable is truthy when non-empty (defined and non-null).

internal/cicontext/eval_test.go

@@ -120,6 +120,12 @@ func TestEvalIf(t *testing.T) {
 		// ── Permissive fallback ───────────────────────────────────────────────
 		{"unparseable returns true", `this is not valid syntax %%%`, true},
 		{"empty expr returns true", ``, true},
+
+		// ── Single = as alias for == ──────────────────────────────────────────
+		{"single eq match", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH = "develop"`, true},
+		{"single eq no match", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH = "main"`, false},
+		{"single eq in compound", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH = "develop" && $CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE = "push"`, true},
+		{"single eq compound false", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH = "main" && $CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE = "push"`, false},
 	}
 
 	for _, tc := range tests {
@@ -131,3 +137,48 @@ func TestEvalIf(t *testing.T) {
 		})
 	}
 }
+
+func TestEvalIfStrict(t *testing.T) {
+	vars := func(key string) string {
+		m := map[string]string{
+			"CI_COMMIT_BRANCH":   "develop",
+			"CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE": "push",
+			"WORKFLOW":           "",
+		}
+		return m[key]
+	}
+
+	tests := []struct {
+		name string
+		expr string
+		want bool
+	}{
+		// Parseable expressions behave identically to EvalIf.
+		{"parseable match", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH == "develop"`, true},
+		{"parseable no match", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH == "main"`, false},
+		{"single eq match", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH = "develop"`, true},
+		// Empty expression: ruleIfMatchesStrict handles the empty→true case
+		// before calling EvalIfStrict, so empty falls through to false here.
+		{"empty expr", ``, false},
+
+		// Unparseable expressions return false (strict) instead of true (permissive).
+		{"unparseable returns false", `this is not valid syntax %%%`, false},
+
+		// The key workflow-rule scenario: a complex condition with an
+		// unevaluable sub-expression should not match (strict=false) so that
+		// later workflow rules can be evaluated.
+		{"workflow rule complex no match", `$WORKFLOW = "gitflow" && $CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE == /(push|web)/`, false},
+
+		// Compound with a bad second operand: strict returns false.
+		{"and with bad rhs strict false", `$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH == "develop" && !(((`, false},
+	}
+
+	for _, tc := range tests {
+		t.Run(tc.name, func(t *testing.T) {
+			got := EvalIfStrict(tc.expr, vars)
+			if got != tc.want {
+				t.Errorf("EvalIfStrict(%q) = %v, want %v", tc.expr, got, tc.want)
+			}
+		})
+	}
+}

internal/cicontext/reachability.go

@@ -42,7 +42,11 @@ func EvalWorkflow(p *model.Pipeline, ctx *Context) (bool, map[string]string) {
 	}
 	vars := ctx.Get
 	for _, rule := range p.Workflow.Rules {
-		if !ruleIfMatches(rule.If, vars) {
+		// Workflow rules use strict evaluation: an unparseable condition is
+		// treated as no-match so later rules (with valid conditions or a
+		// bare when:) are reached. Permissive-true would cause an early rule
+		// with a complex/invalid condition to block all subsequent rules.
+		if !ruleIfMatchesStrict(rule.If, vars) {
 			continue
 		}
 		when := rule.When
@@ -94,6 +98,13 @@ func ruleIfMatches(ifExpr string, vars func(string) string) bool {
 	return EvalIf(ifExpr, vars)
 }
 
+func ruleIfMatchesStrict(ifExpr string, vars func(string) string) bool {
+	if ifExpr == "" {
+		return true // no if: condition → rule always matches
+	}
+	return EvalIfStrict(ifExpr, vars)
+}
+
 func whenToState(when string) JobState {
 	switch when {
 	case "never":