Commit graph

4 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
codex-bot-andresmgsl
e639e67f09 docs(labels): split fork and same-repo wake latency
All checks were successful
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 3m49s
CI / release-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 24s
CI / self-guards (pull_request) Successful in 21s
CI / action-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 20s
CI / docs-sync-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 20s
labels / labels (pull_request) Successful in 22s
Refs guard / refs-not-closing (pull_request) Successful in 20s
2026-08-24 23:59:17 +00:00
clad2
ceaf66bd13 docs(labels): claim the measured invariant, not an unmeasured Forgejo defect
All checks were successful
CI / test (pull_request) Successful in 3m15s
CI / release-exercise (pull_request) Successful in 11s
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
Refs guard / refs-not-closing (pull_request) Successful in 6s
labels / labels (pull_request) Successful in 8s
The evidence shows the called workflow did not see the caller's event inputs
on THIS instance while the top level received them (runs 459/523 vs probe
6/7); it does not show what GitHub or a declared-and-passed input does, so
every prose site now states declare-and-pass as the measured-reliable channel
rather than attributing a drop to Forgejo (@codex-reviewer-andresmgsl, !218
blocker 2).

Refs #215
2026-08-05 21:18:29 +00:00
clad2
baa683211e fix(labels): pass bootstrap through the workflow_call boundary it was lost at
A called workflow cannot read the caller's dispatch inputs on this forge:
github.event.inputs is empty inside workflow_call even though the top-level
caller receives the value in both contexts (probe runs 6/7). The sweep's gate
read exactly that, so every dispatch-woken sweep bootstrapped — runs 459 and
523, ~20 label upserts per board event — while the trigger honestly logged
bootstrap=no.

The bridge, per the #6361 contract: labels-sweep.yml declares
workflow_call.inputs.bootstrap (string, default "no"); the dogfood caller and
the published CONSUMERS.md stub pass it via with.bootstrap with empty mapped
to "no" at the caller — kimi's edge: on schedule the top-level context is
empty, and an empty that slipped through would have turned every cron into a
bootstrap. The gate feeds the declared input to labels-reconcile unchanged,
so an invalid value meets the action's own yes|no refusal.

test/labels-bootstrap.test.sh pins every hop: the declared boundary, both
gates as the identity, no expression reading github.event.inputs (scoped to
${{ }} bodies — the file's prose names the context to explain it), the two
pass-throughs byte-exact, and the four value paths driven through the shipped
expressions into the action's real validator. Mutations: dropping the
declaration reds 4, dropping the pass-through reds 3, restoring the old gate
reds 2.

Refs #215
2026-08-05 21:06:29 +00:00
dan-claude-bot
45aa806207 labels: detach the reconcile sweep from PR-triggered runs (#209)
The sweep rode the same workflow run as the PR event that woke it, so
every displacement in the shared labels-reconcile queue recorded a
CANCELLED reconcile check on some PR — fake red CI that held review
requests. The reconcile + issueflow jobs move, unchanged, to a new
reusable labels-sweep.yml behind their own caller; labels.yml gains a
trigger job that dispatches the consumer's sweep caller with the plain
GITHUB_TOKEN (workflow_dispatch is a documented no-retrigger exemption)
on every event that used to run reconcile. A displaced sweep now cancels
on the Actions tab, attached to no PR; PR checks show scope + trigger.

Because every trigger-driven wake arrives as workflow_dispatch, the event
name alone no longer separates the operator's manual bootstrap from an
event-woken sweep: the sweep caller's bootstrap dispatch input does — the
trigger passes no, a bare manual dispatch defaults to yes. The sweep
reusable also takes pr_workflow_name, exported as SELF_WORKFLOW for the
#208 reconciler (harmless to earlier ones; zero file overlap with #208).

The trigger is deliberately loud: a pin bumped without the sweep caller,
its bootstrap input, or actions: write on the labels caller goes red at
the trigger job instead of silently never sweeping again — documented in
docs/CONSUMERS.md with the split stubs and the atomic-adoption note.

Refs #209

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-01 16:20:00 +00:00