Compare commits

...
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
yonlu d414fdb2b6 docs: a CI-only change is ci:, not fix(ci):
CI / check (push) Skipped
CI / e2e (push) Skipped
CI / check (pull_request) Successful in 2m25s
CI / e2e (pull_request) Successful in 6m24s
The commit-analyzer reads the type and ignores the scope, so `fix` is a
patch whatever sits 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.

CLAUDE.md already warned that a mistyped feat ships a minor version.
That was not enough, because this was not a mistyped type: `fix` was
chosen deliberately, in the belief that the (ci) scope qualified it.

The version bump is the small half, which is why this gets a paragraph
rather than a clause. 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 and desktop-assets -- on a
runner with capacity 1, where the APK build alone is tens of minutes
and publishes a signed artifact to a public registry. So a mistyped
type is six workflow runs, not an odd-looking changelog.

`make release-dry` answers this before the merge instead of after, and
is cheaper than any one of those runs.

The two releases are staying: they are already published, and a version
that vanishes is worse for whoever pulled it than one that turns out to
be empty.

Closes #111
2026-08-18 19:40:43 -04:00
yonlu bf0a53e64c Merge pull request 'Give the unclaim step a CA bundle' (#110) from fix/unclaim-ca-certs into main
Release / release (push) Successful in 31s
CI / e2e (push) Successful in 6m3s
CI / check (push) Successful in 2m22s
Build & publish the Android APK / apk (push) Successful in 1m24s
Build & publish Arch package / arch-package (push) Successful in 2m29s
Attach the desktop build to the release / linux (push) Successful in 52s
Sync Homebrew formula / sync-formula (push) Successful in 6s
Reviewed-on: #110
2026-08-18 23:30:31 +00:00
yonlu 7be4a02e31 fix(ci): give the unclaim step a CA bundle
CI / check (push) Skipped
CI / e2e (push) Skipped
CI / check (pull_request) Successful in 2m27s
CI / e2e (pull_request) Successful in 6m14s
Second defect in the same workflow. The shell fix took -- the step ran
under `bash --noprofile --norc -e -o pipefail` -- and got one layer
further before failing:

  curl: (77) error setting certificate file: /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt

ubuntu:24.04 ships no CA bundle, and --no-install-recommends skips the
ca-certificates that curl recommends, so curl came up unable to verify
TLS against our own Gitea.

This was avoidable by reading the repo rather than reasoning about it:
ci.yml (twice), desktop-assets.yml, android-apk.yml and release.yml all
spell out `ca-certificates curl ... jq` for exactly this reason. The
convention was written down five times already.

Validated in the real image this time rather than by extracting the
script and running it on the host, which is what missed this: the step
now succeeds inside `docker run ubuntu:24.04` against a scratch issue --
label present, 204, label gone -- and the previous version reproduces
`curl: (77)` in the same image. Both checked, then the scratch issue was
deleted.

The DELETE also keeps its response body now and prints it on a non-204.
Whether the automatic token carries issue-write scope is still unproven,
because both failures happened before the API call, and "403" without
Gitea's own sentence would cost another merge to interpret.

Closes #102
2026-08-18 19:08:50 -04:00
2 changed files with 33 additions and 2 deletions
+16 -2
View File
@@ -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
+17
View File
@@ -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