fix: check correct condition in package reconciler

[tenstad]

Description of your changes

Simply changes the condition checked before issuing a Successfully configured package revision event in the package reconciler.

We are seeing a large amount of Successfully configured package revision events:

kubectl describe providerrevisions.pkg.crossplane.io provider-family-azure-90808de820d9

Events:
Type Reason Age From Message

---

Normal SyncPackage 38m (x3110490 over 6d) package-runtime/providerrevision.pkg.crossplane.io Successfully configured package revision

I'm thinking it's due to the change in 8d44f18#r176263065.
and that the condition in the if GetCondition should match the one in MarkConditions.

I have:

• Read and followed Crossplane's contribution process.
• [ ] Run ./nix.sh flake check to ensure this PR is ready for review.
• [ ] Added or updated unit tests.
• [ ] Added or updated e2e tests.
• [ ] Linked a PR or a docs tracking issue to document this change.
• [ ] Added backport release-x.y labels to auto-backport this PR.
• [ ] Followed the API promotion workflow if this PR introduces, removes, or promotes an API.

Need help with this checklist? See the cheat sheet.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The reconciler's health status determination was updated to use the runtime-specific healthy condition type (v1.TypeRuntimeHealthy) instead of the generic healthy condition type (v1.TypeHealthy). This single-line change affects the evaluation logic for marking the runtime as healthy after post-establish hooks complete.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Health Status Condition Check internal/controller/pkg/runtime/reconciler.go	Updated the condition type from TypeHealthy to TypeRuntimeHealthy when evaluating runtime health status after post-establish hooks, ensuring runtime-specific health semantics are used.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~5 minutes

---

Quick clarification: Could you help us understand the reasoning behind switching to the runtime-specific condition type? This will help ensure the change aligns with the intended health evaluation semantics across the codebase. Thanks for the contribution!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly describes the fix: checking the correct condition in the package reconciler, matching the main change in the PR.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is directly related to the changeset, explaining the motivation for changing which condition is checked and providing context about the observed issue.
Breaking Changes	✅ Passed	The modified file is located in internal/ package, outside the breaking changes check scope which only applies to apis/** or cmd/** directories. Internal implementation details do not affect public APIs.
Feature Gate Requirement	✅ Passed	This pull request is a bug fix correcting a logic error in condition checking, not a new experimental feature. The change involves existing condition types and does not affect the APIs directory.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[negz]

Thanks, good catch.