Step 2 took the build consequence away from a `v*` tag — `main` has already
built and published the commit by the time anyone tags it, and rebuilding
would re-push `:c-<sha>`, which rule 145 forbids even when the source
matches. That left the tag with nothing to do at all.
This is the job it has instead. Step 6 put the derived version in the
Settings footer, so an operator can say WHICH build they are running; this
says what is in it that was not in the one they ran last month. Both halves
of one question (note #3127 §5).
The previous release is found by walking ANCESTRY, not by sorting a list.
That is load-bearing here specifically: rule 148 moved the tag shape from
`v26.05.22.0` to `v2026.08.28.2208`, and lexicographically `v2026...` sorts
BEFORE `v26...` — the third character is `0` against `6`. A sorted
implementation would reach back past every new-shape tag to the newest
old-shape one and publish months of commits as "changes since", looking
entirely correct while doing it. `git describe --exclude` is immune to the
shape change, and reachability is the more honest question anyway.
The publisher GETs and PATCHes rather than POSTing and recovering the id
from a 409 — note #3127 §6.7, which is ThoughtSync #2182's bug. A `v*` tag
is created once so the conflict path is rare, but "rare" is how that one
survived to be found somewhere else.
Cross-checks are reported on the release, not enforced. The tag is already
pushed by the time this runs, so failing would leave the operator with a tag,
no release, and a red lane to explain it — while the release is still the
useful object. It says so at the top when the tag names a version the web
image does not report, or when the commit is not on `main` and the `:c-`
rollback refs it lists were never published.
Nothing runs on a schedule and nothing auto-tags on merge. Release tags are
bookmarks (note #3127 §0); FC went twelve weeks without one and nothing was
wrong.
Also here:
- `scripts/` joins the ruff lane. release_notes.py runs only on a tag push,
so a syntax error there would otherwise surface at the one moment nobody
wants to be debugging a workflow.
- version.spec.js reads the workflow directory instead of listing three
files by hand. Its own comment says the assertion should survive consumers
coming and going; the hardcoded list was the part that could not, and
release.yml would have joined the directory without joining the check.
Tests build a synthetic history spanning the tag-shape change rather than
leaning on this repo's tags, so the span assertion holds whether or not a
checkout brought the tags along — a span test that quietly skips is worse
than one that fails.
bvandeusen
b6b9fd8287