The documentation describes 0.1.0a7, and the tag trap that cutting it found - #18
Merged
Conversation
… found Post-release, in the order `docs/releasing.md` requires because each step needs the one before it: ask the new image what it accepts — 26 commands, read off `ghcr.io/easybytehub/hullwork:0.1.0a7` rather than off this checkout — then move the five pins in `README.md`, `docker-compose.yml`, `docs/install.md` and `PRIVACY.md`. Doing it the other way round fails `tests/test_the_documentation_describes_the_published_artefact.py` in both directions, which is the whole reason the recording is stored rather than the sequence trusted. ## And a warning earned the hard way `docs/releasing.md` now carries the trap that cutting this release walked into: **the tag goes on the public commit, and `git push <remote> vX` does not do that.** Development happens on a private forge and this repository is a *derivation* of it, so a tag created in the development checkout points at a commit this repository does not have. Pushing it brings the objects the tag needs — and for about ten minutes the withheld paths were browsable at that ref. No credential was exposed: the deployment's environment file is not tracked. What was exposed is the internal item ledger and the deployment's own compose, which name a private address, a port and two hostnames — exactly the set the publish script guards. Two things made it worse before they made it better, and both are in the warning: the tag ruleset **refused the deletion**, which is the rule working as intended, and the tag push started **two** release runs — one building from the private commit. That one was cancelled inside a minute and published nothing. The release came from the derived commit: the image has no `work/`, no `deploy/` and no `scripts/`, and `gh attestation verify` passes on it. The procedure now spells out the three API calls that create a tag on this repository pointing at its own `main`. The four earlier tags were cut that way and none of them exposes anything. Signed-off-by: Javier Miralles Rancaño <68760931+FlagshipDev@users.noreply.github.com>
FlagshipDev
enabled auto-merge (squash)
August 7, 2026 13:02
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Post-release, in the order
docs/releasing.mdrequires because each step needs the one before it: askthe new image what it accepts — 26 commands, read off
ghcr.io/easybytehub/hullwork:0.1.0a7ratherthan off this checkout — then move the five pins in
README.md,docker-compose.yml,docs/install.mdandPRIVACY.md.Doing it the other way round fails
tests/test_the_documentation_describes_the_published_artefact.pyin both directions, which is the whole reason the recording is stored rather than the sequence trusted.
And a warning earned the hard way
docs/releasing.mdnow carries the trap that cutting this release walked into: the tag goes on thepublic commit, and
git push <remote> vXdoes not do that.Development happens on a private forge and this repository is a derivation of it, so a tag created in
the development checkout points at a commit this repository does not have. Pushing it brings the
objects the tag needs — and for about ten minutes the withheld paths were browsable at that ref.
No credential was exposed: the deployment's environment file is not tracked. What was exposed is the
internal item ledger and the deployment's own compose, which name a private address, a port and two
hostnames — exactly the set the publish script guards.
Two things made it worse before they made it better, and both are in the warning: the tag ruleset
refused the deletion, which is the rule working as intended, and the tag push started two
release runs — one building from the private commit. That one was cancelled inside a minute and
published nothing. The release came from the derived commit: the image has no
work/, nodeploy/andno
scripts/, andgh attestation verifypasses on it.The procedure now spells out the three API calls that create a tag on this repository pointing at its
own
main. The four earlier tags were cut that way and none of them exposes anything.Signed-off-by: Javier Miralles Rancaño 68760931+FlagshipDev@users.noreply.github.com