Compare commits
3
Commits
v0.2.1
...
d414fdb2b6
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
d414fdb2b6 | ||
|
|
bf0a53e64c | ||
|
|
7be4a02e31 |
@@ -58,8 +58,15 @@ jobs:
|
||||
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 curl jq >/dev/null
|
||||
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" |
|
||||
@@ -78,8 +85,14 @@ jobs:
|
||||
# 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 /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' -X DELETE \
|
||||
curl -sS -o "$body" -w '%{http_code}' -X DELETE \
|
||||
-H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" \
|
||||
"$API/issues/$ISSUE/labels/$label_id"
|
||||
)
|
||||
@@ -88,6 +101,7 @@ jobs:
|
||||
204) echo "unclaim: #$ISSUE is closed and unclaimed" ;;
|
||||
*)
|
||||
echo "unclaim: DELETE returned $code for #$ISSUE" >&2
|
||||
cat "$body" >&2
|
||||
exit 1
|
||||
;;
|
||||
esac
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -2138,6 +2138,23 @@ Pre-commit hooks verify generated code is fresh — always run `make generate` a
|
||||
mistyped `feat` ships a minor version. `make release-dry` answers "what
|
||||
would this merge release" without pushing.
|
||||
|
||||
**The analyzer reads the type and ignores the scope, so a CI-only change
|
||||
is `ci:` and never `fix(ci):`.** The scope is decoration; `fix` is a
|
||||
patch whatever is in the brackets. Two commits touching nothing but
|
||||
`.gitea/workflows/unclaim.yml` were written `fix(ci):` and cut `v0.2.1`
|
||||
and `v0.2.2` — real releases, published to Arch, Homebrew and the APK
|
||||
registry, containing no user-facing change. They were left in place
|
||||
rather than deleted, because a version that vanishes is worse for
|
||||
whoever pulled it than one that turns out to be empty.
|
||||
|
||||
**The blast radius is bigger than the version number**, which is what
|
||||
makes this worth a paragraph. A merge to `main` starts two workflows;
|
||||
if `release.yml` then pushes a tag, that tag push starts **four more**
|
||||
(`arch-package`, `homebrew-formula`, `android-apk`, `desktop-assets`) —
|
||||
on a runner with capacity 1, where the APK build alone is tens of
|
||||
minutes. `make release-dry` before merging is how you find out, and it
|
||||
is cheaper than every one of those.
|
||||
|
||||
**`@semantic-release/github` is not in that config and must not be.**
|
||||
Gitea's API is `/api/v1` and is not GitHub's surface, so
|
||||
`@semantic-release/exec` calls `scripts/gitea-release.sh` instead — one
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user