Repository navigation
fix(workflows): a duplicate refusal must not skip the other skill edition - #44
Merged
Merged
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. Next included review available in 2 minutes. View limit details
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
fix(workflows): the ClawHub publish step walked the two skill editions as flat statementsunder
bash -e, so when the registry refused the second one as a duplicate, the step endedbefore the second edition was submitted and the verify step — the only thing in the job that
could see a missing half — never ran. It is one loop now: a duplicate refusal is recorded as
already registeredand the loop continues; a genuine failure still reddens the step at theend, and the verify step stays the only judge of whether a listing arrived.
docs(agents): the 0.8.0 release had no record at all (published 2026-10-17, recorded2026-10-21), so both 0.8.0 and 0.9.0 are written from outside readings — npm dist-tag, shasum,
unpacked size, attestations status, release author, and a temp-prefix install that actually
runs the published binary. Plus the
### ClawHub registrymeasurement of this release'srefusal and two new pitfalls rows (the duplicate refusal; a global npm shim with no package
behind it).
Verification
.scratch/extract-clawhub-step.pyslices thepublish region out of
publish.ymlitself, and a stubclawhubanswers per scenario. 9assertions pass — including the control that runs the old text against the same refusal and
reproduces the defect (step exits non-zero,
euthyna-ennever attempted), and the equivalencecheck that the clean-run argv transcript is byte-identical to the old step, so the
refactor moves control flow only, never what gets written to the registry.
publish.ymlparses (yaml.safe_load): three jobs, and theclawhubstep names unchanged.node --test: 324 tests, 323 pass, 0 fail, 1 skip.pass|clean|0.9.0, so the release landed on allthree channels (npm
latest: 0.9.0, GitHub releaseeuthyna 0.9.0, ClawHub both editions).Limit of this change
clawhubruns only on av*tag push, so nothing here is exercised until the next release cutsone. The next rehearsal (
gh workflow run publish.yml --ref main -f publish=false) still skipsthe job — it is gated on a push event or
inputs.publish == true. The stub harness is thereforethe only pre-release check this path gets; the durable one is the verify step, which fails the
job when a listing does not reach
decision=passfor the version andlatest.