Skip to content

chore: propagate changes from main into development - #1406

Merged
Wikid82 merged 13 commits into
developmentfrom
main
Sep 28, 2026
Merged

Wikid82 merged 13 commits into
developmentfrom
main

Conversation

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Automated PR to propagate changes from main into development.

Triggered by push to main.

Wikid82 and others added 2 commits September 28, 2026 11:12
…seded E2E run as a failure

The check-nightly-health job in weekly-nightly-promotion.yml resolved
nightly's HEAD sha once before its 40-minute poll loop, then polled for
required workflow runs against that pinned sha. nightly-build.yml's daily
cron (0 9 * * *) and this workflow's own weekly cron shared the same
09:00 UTC slot (despite a comment claiming an offset), so nightly-build
could re-sync nightly to a new sha mid-poll and dispatch its own E2E run
for it. Because e2e-tests-split.yml's concurrency group is keyed on
branch ref (not sha), that new dispatch cancelled the in-progress run for
the old, still-tracked sha - which the poll loop then reported as a real
failure and used to block promotion, even though current nightly HEAD was
fully green (see #1404).

Re-resolve nightly HEAD on every poll iteration; if it has advanced,
follow the new sha and reset tracking instead of counting the superseded
run's cancellation as a failure. Also move this workflow's cron to 09:30
UTC, genuinely offset from nightly-build's sync, as defense in depth
against scheduler jitter observed to exceed 15 minutes.
@github-advanced-security

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

You are seeing this message because GitHub Code Scanning has recently been set up for this repository, or this pull request contains the workflow file for the Code Scanning tool.

What Enabling Code Scanning Means:

  • The 'Security' tab will display more code scanning analysis results (e.g., for the default branch).
  • Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results.
  • You will be able to see the analysis results for the pull request's branch on this overview once the scans have completed and the checks have passed.

For more information about GitHub Code Scanning, check out the documentation.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Sep 28, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 28, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

✅ Supply Chain Verification Results

✅ PASSED

📦 SBOM Summary

  • Components: 1865

🔍 Vulnerability Scan

Severity Count
🔴 Critical 0
🟠 High 0
🟡 Medium 0
🟢 Low 0
Total 0

📎 Artifacts

  • SBOM (CycloneDX JSON) and Grype results available in workflow artifacts

Generated by Supply Chain Verification workflow • View Details

…very steps

The 2026-09-28 weekly promotion merged real feat/fix commits (including the
#1317 security hardening work) but release-please logged "No user facing
commits found... skipping" because the previous release commit landed as
the promotion merge's immediate first parent, starving its history walk
before it could descend into nightly's second-parent commits.

Documents the root cause and recovery in docs/troubleshooting/ and adds a
pointer in CLAUDE.md's CI/CD section so it's recognized immediately next
time, rather than re-diagnosed from scratch.
PR #1408 documented this as a first-parent-adjacency quirk, but that
was wrong: a structurally identical prior promotion (2c59ac5) had the
same non-conventional merge title and correctly surfaced a buried fix
commit, and adding a spacer commit (per the original doc's recovery
advice) did not fix the 2026-09-28 incident - it only reproduced the
same truncation one commit later (see PR #1410).

The real cause is date-ordering: release-please's commit walk stops at
the release boundary's commit DATE, not a fixed graph position. Nightly
commits older than an interim release that lands directly on main get
silently stranded regardless of branch routing or spacer commits.
Corrects the doc and adds the actual recovery procedure (hand-correct
the release-please PR) used to fix v0.43.0.
…omotion

release-please's commit-collection walk on main stops at the previous
release boundary's commit date rather than true git ancestry. When an
interim hotfix release lands on main while nightly still has release-worthy
commits dated older than that new boundary, those nightly commits are
silently stranded once the promotion merge finally brings them in (see
docs/troubleshooting/release-please-skips.md for the full 2026-09-28
incident writeup).

Add a pre-check job to release-please.yml that compares nightly's tip
against the commit that would become the new release boundary. If nightly
has any feat/fix/perf/revert/deps commits older than that boundary, the
release-please job is skipped for this push instead of cutting a release.
This is self-healing: the guard re-evaluates on every push to main, so it
naturally clears once nightly's backlog lands (whether via that week's
promotion merge or a future one), at which point release-please resumes
and correctly bundles everything that was deferred.

The guard only defers when nightly genuinely has older, unpromoted
release-worthy commits pending — an interim hotfix during a week where
nightly has nothing pending, or where nightly's pending commits are newer
than the boundary, is unaffected.

Logic lives in scripts/ci/check-nightly-sequencing.sh with bats coverage in
scripts/tests/check-nightly-sequencing.bats, wired into quality-checks.yml.
Wikid82 and others added 4 commits September 28, 2026 10:19
release-please's own automated run reset this branch back to 0.42.2
when PRs #1411 and #1412 merged (each push to main re-triggers
release-please.yml, which recomputes and force-overwrites this PR from
scratch). The underlying date-ordering bug (see
docs/troubleshooting/release-please-skips.md) still applies to the gap
between the v0.42.1 tag and current main, so the recomputed PR is wrong
for the same reason as before. Re-applying the correction; merging this
immediately to avoid another reset from a subsequent push.
@Wikid82
Wikid82 merged commit b21f710 into development Sep 28, 2026
107 of 108 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants