Skip to content

Reset repo content to match eda58ec02689 (pre-testbed state) - #481

Merged
jdcmsd merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
reset-to-eda58ec
Jun 12, 2026
Merged

Reset repo content to match eda58ec02689 (pre-testbed state)#481
jdcmsd merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
reset-to-eda58ec

Conversation

@jdcmsd

@jdcmsd jdcmsd commented Jun 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This reverts it to before I started messing with Erick's automation, since my messing with Erick's automation proved unnecessary to the rescoped project.

But I will still need to test automations, so, we clean the desk.

@jdcmsd
jdcmsd requested a review from a team as a code owner June 12, 2026 17:47
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

❌ Issue Linking Required

This PR could not be linked to an issue. All PRs must be linked to an issue for tracking purposes.

How to fix this:

Option 1: Add keyword to PR body (Recommended - auto-removes this comment)
Edit this PR description and add one of these lines:

  • This PR fixes #123 or Fixes: #123

  • This PR closes #123 or Closes: #123

  • This PR resolves #123 or Resolves: #123

  • Other supported keywords: fix, fixed, close, closed, resolve, resolved
    Option 2: Link via GitHub UI (Note: won't clear the failed check)

  1. Go to the PR → Development section (right sidebar)

  2. Click "Link issue" and select an existing issue

  3. Push a new commit or re-run the workflow to clear the failed check
    Option 3: Use branch naming
    Create a new branch with one of these patterns:

  • 123-feature-description (number at start)

  • issue-123-feature-description (issue-number at start)

  • feature-issue-123 (issue-number anywhere)

Why is this required?

Issue linking ensures proper tracking, documentation, and helps maintain project history. It connects your code changes to the problem they solve.---

This comment was automatically generated by the issue linking workflow

@claude

claude Bot commented Jun 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Claude finished @jdcmsd's task in 1m 33s —— View job


Claude finished @jdcmsd's task in 1m 37s —— View job


PR Review: Reset AI release-notes workflow to pre-testbed state

  • Read the diff (git diff origin/main...HEAD)
  • Compared against the eda58ec target state
  • Reviewed the full workflow for input/version consistency

This is a desk-cleaning revert in a test repo, so stakes are low — but there's one thing worth verifying before you rely on this workflow actually running.

⚠️ Possible input/version mismatch with claude-code-action@v1

The revert restores the legacy-style inputs while keeping uses: anthropics/claude-code-action@v1 (.github/workflows/cicd_comp_ai-release-notes-phase.yml:140):

prompt_file: /tmp/claude-prompt.md
allowed_tools: "Write"
max_turns: 3
timeout_minutes: 10

The version on main used the v1-style API instead:

prompt: ${{ env.PROMPT_CONTENT }}
claude_args: "--allowedTools Write --max-turns 3"

My concern: claude-code-action@v1 consolidated its configuration into prompt + claude_args. prompt_file, allowed_tools, max_turns, and timeout_minutes are the beta/v0.x input names. If v1's action.yml doesn't declare them, GitHub Actions silently ignores unknown with: keys — meaning the action would run with no prompt at all and the tool/turn limits would be dropped. The downstream Update release description step (line 152) would then fail on the missing /tmp/release-notes.md. (Note: the job is continue-on-error: true, so this would fail quietly rather than break the release.)

I couldn't confirm this against the action's action.ymlWebFetch permission wasn't granted in this run — so please treat it as verify, don't assume. The quickest check:

curl -s https://raw.githubusercontent.com/anthropics/claude-code-action/v1/action.yml \
  | grep -E '^\s+(prompt|prompt_file|claude_args|allowed_tools|max_turns|timeout_minutes):'

If those four legacy inputs aren't listed, pin to the matching older tag (e.g. @v0/@beta) or keep the main (prompt/claude_args) form. Fix this →

Minor: removed id-token: write

-      id-token: write      # Required by claude-code-action for OIDC

Fine for anthropic_api_key auth (OIDC is only needed for Bedrock/Vertex). Just flagging that the comment on main explicitly claimed it was required — if any path in the action requests an OIDC token, it'd warn. Low risk for direct API-key usage.

Not a concern

Dropping the GITHUB_ENV heredoc in favor of prompt_file (a file on disk) is actually cleaner re: shell-escaping — no regression there, assuming the input is supported (see above).


Note: I can't push a fix here regardless — the GitHub App isn't permitted to modify .github/workflows/ files, and this was a review request.
· branch reset-to-eda58ec

@jdcmsd
jdcmsd merged commit 34dd207 into main Jun 12, 2026
42 of 44 checks passed
@claude claude Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 15, 2026
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.

1 participant