5 commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| dc87051c69 |
docs(runner-probes): enumerate the real carriers, spare the consumer checkouts, and make the snippet run (#202)
All checks were successful
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 3m8s
CI / release-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 11s
CI / self-guards (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / action-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / docs-sync-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Refs guard / refs-not-closing (pull_request) Has been skipped
labels / labels (pull_request) Successful in 8s
@codex-reviewer-andresmgsl's three, all verified against current main before
fixing.
1. THERE ARE THREE SELF-REF CARRIERS, NOT TWO — labels-sweep.yml:52,
labels.yml:51, release.yml:132. My `[ "$n" -eq 2 ]` came from the
pre-upstream tree, so it would have REJECTED a correctly armed candidate and
told the operator to rewrite two of three, leaving one workflow pinned to
the tag. The gate enumerates from the tree now, with the derivation commands
beside the table so the list is re-checked rather than trusted.
2. NOT EVERY `repository:` BELONGS TO THE FORK. Three are
`${{ github.repository }}` — labels-sweep.yml:69, labels.yml:92,
release-exercise.yml:72 — and they fetch the CALLER's repository. My loop
required every one to equal the fork, which would have rewritten the
consumer checkouts and quietly changed what the probe exercises. Internal
self-checkouts (four) are asserted to be the fork; consumer checkouts are
asserted to stay dynamic.
3. EACH CHECK IS BOUND TO THE TREE IT IS ABOUT — `git -C "$armed"` for the
carriers, `git -C "$probe"` for the callers, instead of depending on the
operator's current directory. And `mapfile` rather than `git grep | while …
fail`: the loop ran in a pipeline subshell, so `fail` exited the subshell
and the gate carried on. Collect first, validate after, under a declared
`set -euo pipefail`.
And the snippet is now executable rather than illustrative: placeholders became
positional parameters, so it parses, is shellcheck-clean, and runs. Driven
against the unarmed tree it refuses with `CEREMONY_SELF_REF=0.6.0` — a tag
rather than the candidate SHA, which is exactly the case it exists to catch.
Publishing a gate that could not run would have been the same defect one level
up.
Branch updated from merged main (
|
|||
| 7e02344672 |
docs(runner-probes): the arming gate asserts what each carrier IS, not that a literal is gone (#202)
All checks were successful
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 3m2s
CI / release-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 10s
CI / self-guards (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / action-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / docs-sync-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Refs guard / refs-not-closing (pull_request) Has been skipped
labels / labels (pull_request) Successful in 8s
@codex-reviewer-andresmgsl: absence of the canonical coordinate is not proof of correct arming. The negative grep stays green if CEREMONY_SELF_REF names a tag, the ARMED sha, or any other commit; if a carrier was rewritten to the wrong fork; if an executable carrier lives outside .github; or if a carrier simply disappeared rather than being rewritten. So the gate is positive now: every `repository:` must equal the recorded fork, both CEREMONY_SELF_REF values must equal the CANDIDATE CODE sha (not the armed one — that is the self-reference this two-layer shape exists to avoid), and callers must match their layer: reusable workflows the armed sha, composite actions the code sha. With a COUNT beside the comparison. `n -eq 2` is the part that catches a carrier which vanished, which a per-value loop cannot see — the same shape as counting the call sites a pin is guarding rather than only checking the ones that are there. The canonical-coordinate grep stays as a cheap extra rather than as the proof. Wording, same review: steps 1 and 2 advance the tip of ONE fork branch, so reset removes that branch, not "candidate and armed branches". test/run.sh 28/28; shellcheck 0.10.0 and changelog-armed clean. Refs #202 |
|||
| e27acd8ab9 |
docs(runner-probes): arming is two layers, because a commit cannot contain its own SHA (#202)
All checks were successful
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 3m2s
CI / release-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 10s
CI / self-guards (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / action-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / docs-sync-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Refs guard / refs-not-closing (pull_request) Has been skipped
labels / labels (pull_request) Successful in 8s
@codex-reviewer-andresmgsl found that the procedure was not executable as
written, and the reason is structural rather than a wording slip.
The candidate's workflows carry `repository: heavy-duty/ceremony` beside
`ref: ${{ env.CEREMONY_SELF_REF }}`, so arming must rewrite them. But
rewriting CREATES A NEW COMMIT, and a commit cannot embed its own object ID. So
a single-layer arming is self-referential: pin the callers to the pre-rewrite
SHA and they load the UNARMED workflows; pin them to the post-rewrite SHA and
you are asking that commit to contain itself. My step 3 asked for exactly that.
Two layers, stated as a table because the distinction is the whole thing:
candidate code SHA the immutable tree under test — actions/, lib/
armed workflow SHA a child commit whose workflows point at the fork and
whose CEREMONY_SELF_REF is the candidate code SHA
And callers pin by layer, because they are not the same thing: composite
actions to the candidate code SHA, reusable workflows to the armed SHA, which
is the only revision whose inner checkout is rewritten.
The completeness check becomes a mechanical non-zero gate — `git grep` for
executable `uses:`/`repository:` carriers over the ARMED tree, exiting non-zero
on any hit — rather than "every remaining hit must be prose". A partial rewrite
does not announce itself: it silently tests canonical main.
The result issue records both SHAs, not one, or a later reader cannot tell
which tree answered.
test/run.sh 28/28; shellcheck 0.10.0 and changelog-armed clean.
Refs #202
|
|||
| e61bb91476 |
docs(runner-probes): its own document, an arming procedure, and the evidence boundary made consistent (#202)
All checks were successful
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 3m2s
CI / release-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 11s
CI / self-guards (pull_request) Successful in 8s
CI / action-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / docs-sync-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Refs guard / refs-not-closing (pull_request) Has been skipped
labels / labels (pull_request) Successful in 8s
@codex-reviewer-andresmgsl's four gaps.
1. BRANCH UPDATED TO CURRENT MAIN. The commit's parent was pre-#204
|
|||
| 08714530b3 |
docs(drills): the standing runner-probe venue, and why it is not a drill (#202)
All checks were successful
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 1m30s
CI / release-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 10s
CI / self-guards (pull_request) Successful in 7s
CI / action-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / docs-sync-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 6s
labels / labels (pull_request) Successful in 8s
@andres ruled option A (#5631): one standing never-archived repo. This is the runbook half. The distinction the document exists to make: a drill is disposable by design and ends with the builder archiving it. This venue is the opposite — it exists so that runner-only facts can be measured on demand, and archiving it defeats the purpose. That is not hypothetical: all three drill repos were archived correctly, by the rule, and each then had to be un-archived or replaced. The request came three times in two days across #192 and #198 and never became anything. What the runbook pins, all of it measured rather than asserted: * a probe MUST run as an Actions job under ${{ github.token }} — the same DELETE answers 500 there and 204 under a PAT, so a probe run any other way produces a confident wrong answer; * probe results are written into the forge, not left in a job log, because logs age out and #192's run 701 survived only because it wrote into an issue; * no probe touches ceremony's own board — the venue exists so the live board is not the fixture; * the three probes it already owes (#192's live label lift, #205's dispatch measurement, a 0.6.0 consumer exercise after #198). STANDING THE REPO UP IS THE OPERATOR'S STEP, and this is the part I could not do rather than the part I chose not to. Measured today with this identity: POST /api/v1/orgs/heavy-duty/repos -> 403 not allowed in organization POST /api/v1/user/repos -> 201 personal namespace only Same shape as the drill delete: a deliberate boundary, not a misconfiguration. The runbook says so, says not to retry it, and says not to work around it by using a personal namespace where the org's runner and secrets do not reach. test/run.sh 22/22, shellcheck 0.10.0, actionlint, self-ref all clean. Refs #202 |