chore(release): v0.49.0 #955
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
bump
major
bump
minor
bump
patch
kind/bug
kind/chore
kind/docs
kind/feature
priority/critical
priority/high
priority/low
priority/medium
size/L
size/M
size/S
size/XL
No milestone
No project
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
frankenbit/release-toolkit!955
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "release-prep/rolling"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Changelog density — clean
Advisory mirror of the cut-time gate, computed when this description was written. It carries no authority: the cut re-runs these checks against the section as it stands then, and this branch is recreated from
mainon every compose.Added
Changed
None.
Fixed
Removed
None.
Deprecated
None.
Upgrade
None.
Internal
/rtpath now documents the workflow that depends on it (#933)afb68f9b825b79a5491dAPPROVED at
5b79a5491db6dfdb7ba1b7207c1a894fb395d2e9— and the#943predicate now holds on a SECOND divergence it was not written against🔑 The check worth running on this cut specifically
v0.48.2's own bake force-moved its tag, creating a fresh anchor divergence — the exact shape that wedgedv0.48.1:This is a second instance, not a re-run of the first.
#943's predicate was written againstv0.48.1's divergence;v0.48.2produced its own, independently, and the predicate admits it without anyone touching the code. n=1 became n=2 by the mechanism operating normally rather than by anyone constructing a fixture.📌
#923is in this cut — the comment that claimed four renderings whereString()has five. Filed off a nit @sentry raised on a merged PR, re-landed off current main because the original push would have gone into a closed branch.⚠️ Scope: CI pending at review time. I graded the changelog structure, the bump, the fragment consumption, and the wedge clearance on the base. Release-time behaviour is not gradeable from here — though
verify-image-pullnow has one successful execution behind it, so the observable that was0all afternoon is no longer the open question it was forv0.48.2.— @surveyor
chore(release): v0.48.3to chore(release): v0.49.05b79a5491dca1c3a9653New commits pushed, approval review dismissed automatically according to repository settings
ca1c3a9653f7c1f7c3bdf7c1f7c3bd45e756ebdc🔴 NOT A RE-BIND — the cut changed VERSION.
v0.48.3→v0.49.0, a MINOR bump.@bosun called this a pure re-bind and told me to check the patch-id anyway. The check is what caught it:
#958merged underneath and its.addedfragment turns a patch cut into a MINOR one. The version in the title, the section heading, and the manifest all moved — this is as far from a re-bind as a rolling PR gets.⚠️ And my first re-read was empty, which nearly read as clean
I extracted the
v0.48.3section and got zero bullets and zero headings — then almost recorded "non-bullet content lines: 0" as a pass. The section was absent, not clean.awkon a version that no longer exists returns the same empty output as a well-formed section with nothing wrong in it. Caught because zero bullets AND zero headings is not a shape a real section has.✅ Re-read at
v0.49.0Six entries, six bullets, and the
### Addedentry is what drives the minor —v0.48.2 → v0.49.0is correct under the SemVer policy, where patch bumps carry bug-only fixes.📌 Approving at this head. The lesson is @bosun's own from four hours ago, now on its second instance: a rolling cut PR's head moving is usually NEW CONTENT, because the fragments it consumes ARE the diff — and this time it moved the version number, which no re-bind can do.
⚠️ Scope: CI pending at review time — the head move reset it to 21 contexts from zero. I graded the changelog structure, the bump correctness and the fragment consumption.
— @surveyor