Merge pull request 'Give the unclaim step a CA bundle' (#110) from fix/unclaim-ca-certs into main

Reviewed-on: #110

.gitea/workflows/unclaim.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
+name: Unclaim
+
+# A `Closes #N` footer in a commit body closes the issue on merge — and
+# leaves `Status/In Progress` on it, because Gitea's auto-close touches
+# state and nothing else.  So #100 was closed and simultaneously marked
+# as being actively worked on, and `scripts/issue.sh close` (which does
+# drop the label) is exactly the thing the footer exists to avoid
+# calling.
+#
+# **This hooks the close, not the merge.**  Stripping the label in the
+# PR would work and would be a per-PR habit; habits are what the footer
+# removed.  `issues: [closed]` covers every path an issue can close by —
+# the footer on merge, `issue.sh close`, someone clicking Close in the
+# web UI — and asks nothing of anyone at any of them.
+#
+# **Reopening deliberately does not restore it.**  Reopening says the
+# work was not finished, not that somebody is at a keyboard doing it
+# now; the claim gets re-made by whoever picks it up.
+#
+# **This is not instant, and should not be described as it.**  The
+# runner has capacity 1 and is shared with an index build that can hold
+# it for three hours, so a label tweak can queue behind one. Stale for
+# an afternoon beats stale forever, which is what it was.
+#
+# The audit that answers "is this still firing" stays in CLAUDE.md and
+# is one command:
+#
+#   ./scripts/issue.sh list --state closed --label "Status/In Progress"
+#
+# A workflow that silently stops working is the failure mode this whole
+# area has already produced once.
+
+on:
+  issues:
+    types: [closed]
+
+jobs:
+  unclaim:
+    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
+    container:
+      image: ubuntu:24.04
+
+    steps:
+      - name: Drop the claim label
+        # **Inside a container the act runner selects `sh`, not bash**, so
+        # `set -o pipefail` fails the job on its second line with "Illegal
+        # option" and the step never reaches the API.  `homebrew-formula.yml`
+        # carries the same `set -euo pipefail` without trouble because it
+        # runs with **no container**, on the host image where bash is the
+        # default — so "another workflow does it" is not evidence here.
+        shell: bash
+        env:
+          # The automatic Actions token, as release.yml uses for the
+          # floor tag.  It needs no more than write access to this repo.
+          TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITEA_TOKEN }}
+          API: ${{ github.server_url }}/api/v1/repos/${{ github.repository }}
+          ISSUE: ${{ github.event.issue.number }}
+        run: |
+          set -euo pipefail
+
+          # `ca-certificates` is named because `--no-install-recommends`
+          # skips it, and `ubuntu:24.04` ships no CA bundle of its own —
+          # so curl comes up unable to verify TLS against our own Gitea
+          # and fails with "error setting certificate file" (exit 77).
+          # Every other containerised workflow here spells it out for the
+          # same reason; this one did not, and cost a release cycle.
+          apt-get update -qq
+          apt-get install -y -qq --no-install-recommends \
+            ca-certificates curl jq >/dev/null
+
+          label_id=$(
+            curl -sSf -H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" "$API/labels?limit=100" |
+              jq -r '.[] | select(.name == "Status/In Progress") | .id'
+          )
+
+          # The label not existing is a repo somebody reorganised, not a
+          # failure of this run — say so and stop, rather than failing a
+          # job on every close from then on.
+          if [ -z "$label_id" ]; then
+            echo "unclaim: no 'Status/In Progress' label in this repo; nothing to do"
+            exit 0
+          fi
+
+          # DELETE is idempotent here: an issue that never carried the
+          # label answers the same as one that did, which is what makes
+          # this safe to run on *every* close rather than only the ones
+          # that were claimed.
+          # The body is captured, not discarded, so a refusal is
+          # diagnosable from this log alone.  Whether the automatic
+          # token carries issue-write scope is still unproven, and
+          # "DELETE returned 403" without Gitea's own sentence costs
+          # another merge to find out which of the two it is.
+          body=$(mktemp)
+          code=$(
+            curl -sS -o "$body" -w '%{http_code}' -X DELETE \
+              -H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" \
+              "$API/issues/$ISSUE/labels/$label_id"
+          )
+
+          case "$code" in
+            204) echo "unclaim: #$ISSUE is closed and unclaimed" ;;
+            *)
+              echo "unclaim: DELETE returned $code for #$ISSUE" >&2
+              cat "$body" >&2
+              exit 1
+              ;;
+          esac

CLAUDE.md

@@ -53,14 +53,50 @@ reinvention:
 - **Hard blockers are real Gitea dependencies**, which render on the
   issue itself, and the blocked issue carries `Status/Blocked`.
 - **A PR body carries a commit-to-issue table, the verification
-  actually run, and a `Closes` list** — PR #83 is the shape.
+  actually run, and a `Closes` list** — PR #83 is the shape. That list
+  is for whoever reads the PR; what actually closes an issue is the
+  footer below.
 
-**And the `Closes` list does not reliably close anything.** #83 listed
-ten and five of them stayed open, shipped in `main`, for a fortnight.
-So closing is a step you take and check, not a keyword you trust:
-`./scripts/issue.sh close <n>` after the merge, with a comment naming
-the commit that shipped it. `close` also drops `Status/In Progress`,
-because a claim outlives the work if nothing takes the label off.
+**The closing keyword goes in the commit body, one issue per line.**
+
+```
+docs: delete four documents that contradict the code
+
+<body>
+
+Closes #98
+```
+
+**Gitea parses commit messages that reach `main`; it does not parse the
+PR body**, which only closes anything if the merge happens to copy it
+into the merge commit. Both halves of that were measured. #83's merge
+commit carried `Closes #9, #13, #14, …` and closed **five of ten** — a
+comma list is partially matched. #93's merge commit body was one
+`Reviewed-on:` trailer, so #92 stayed open behind a perfectly correct
+`Closes` line in the PR description.
+
+A footer costs nothing elsewhere: Conventional Commits allows one,
+`scripts/commit-check.sh` only regexes the subject, and
+semantic-release reads the type from the subject — so this changes no
+release decision. The rule that the issue number stays out of the
+**subject** is unaffected, and was never about the body.
+
+**Check it anyway.** A squash, or a merge message edited by hand,
+still drops the footer. `./scripts/issue.sh list --state open` after a
+merge, looking for what you just shipped; `./scripts/issue.sh close
+<n>` for whatever did not take, with a comment naming the commit.
+
+**Unclaiming is automatic, and it is hooked to the close rather than
+to the merge.** Gitea's auto-close changes state and nothing else, so a
+footer left `Status/In Progress` on a closed issue — #100 was closed
+and marked as being actively worked on at the same time.
+`.gitea/workflows/unclaim.yml` runs on `issues: [closed]`, which covers
+the footer, `issue.sh close` and a click in the web UI alike; stripping
+the label in the PR instead would have been a per-PR habit, and habits
+are what the footer removed. It is not instant — the runner has
+capacity 1 — and reopening deliberately does not restore the label.
+`./scripts/issue.sh list --state closed --label "Status/In Progress"`
+is how you find out it has stopped firing.
 
 ## Planning
 
@@ -2150,10 +2186,11 @@ Pre-commit runs vet, lint, codegen check, and frontend typecheck in parallel. Pr
 
 ## CI
 
-Seven workflows in `.gitea/workflows/`. Five of them package and
+Eight workflows in `.gitea/workflows/`. Five of them package and
 publish (`arch-package`, `homebrew-formula`, `index-artifact`,
 `android-apk`, `desktop-assets`); `release.yml` decides *whether* four of
-those run at all; only `ci.yml` gates, and it is the one to look at when
+those run at all; `unclaim.yml` is housekeeping on the tracker and
+touches no code; only `ci.yml` gates, and it is the one to look at when
 deciding whether a push was healthy.
 
 **`release.yml` is the entry point for all of it.** On every push to