Skip to content

ci(actions-lock): record tag refs for SHA-keyed lock entries - #417

Merged
hyperpolymath merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/actions-lock-repair
Oct 27, 2026
Merged

hyperpolymath merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/actions-lock-repair

Conversation

@hyperpolymath

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

Six records in actions.lock recorded ref: as their own commit SHA. GitHub's lockfile enforcement rejects that ("invalid lockfile pin"). standards#1271 fixed the same entries in standards' lock. No workflow file changes.

Changes

Each record's ref: changes from the SHA to the tag that peels to the same commit, checked with git ls-remote. commit, owner_id and repo_id are unchanged.

  • actions/cache@55cc8345… → v6.1.0
  • actions/checkout@3d3c42e5… → v7.0.1
  • actions/upload-artifact@043fb46d… → v7.0.1
  • erlef/setup-beam@54075bcc… → v1.24.1
  • swatinem/rust-cache@6323deb1… → v2.9.2
  • webfactory/ssh-agent@e8387483… → v0.10.0

Left as is: dtolnay/rust-toolchain@6c977a6c…. No tag peels to that commit, and it is only reached through the standards record.

Testing

  • standards' scripts/check-lock-sync.sh passes.
  • Every lock entry has a dependency record.

Not fixed here

The standards reusables stay at 571cc734. Re-pinning them to a current standards commit makes governance, hypatia-scan and secret-scanner fail at startup with zero jobs; I tested that on hyperpolymath/presswerk#138. That has to be fixed in standards.


Generated by Claude Code

The lock had drifted from the workflow files. GitHub refuses to start a
workflow whose uses: set doesn't match its lock entries, and rejects a
lock entry that records its own SHA as ref.

- record `actions/cache@55cc8345863c…`: `ref:` changes from the SHA to `v6.1.0`, the tag that peels to the same commit
- record `actions/checkout@3d3c42e5aac5…`: `ref:` changes from the SHA to `v7.0.1`, the tag that peels to the same commit
- record `actions/upload-artifact@043fb46d1a93…`: `ref:` changes from the SHA to `v7.0.1`, the tag that peels to the same commit
- record `erlef/setup-beam@54075bcc5e24…`: `ref:` changes from the SHA to `v1.24.1`, the tag that peels to the same commit
- record `swatinem/rust-cache@6323deb102c3…`: `ref:` changes from the SHA to `v2.9.2`, the tag that peels to the same commit
- record `webfactory/ssh-agent@e83874834305…`: `ref:` changes from the SHA to `v0.10.0`, the tag that peels to the same commit

Each new record's commit was checked against the upstream tag with git
ls-remote. No commit an existing entry pins was changed. Standards
reusable pins are left as they are.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0132Cdz3iwk2QGKv2sUhhsye
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 27, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Important

Review skipped

Review was skipped due to path filters

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters: 1
  • .github/workflows/actions.lock is excluded by !**/*.lock

CodeRabbit blocks several paths by default. You can override this behavior by explicitly including those paths in the path filters. For example, including **/dist/** will override the default block on the dist directory, by removing the pattern from both the lists.

Run configuration
  • Source mode: Auto
  • Repository: Unavailable
  • Branch: Unavailable
  • File: No configuration file from this repository applied
  • Commit: Unavailable
  • Layers: Organization UI
  • Review profile: ASSERTIVE
  • Plan: Advanced
  • Run ID: 0041073e-3dec-4fa8-95c7-5e0e1bd790b3

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • No new commits to review - use @coderabbitai full review for a full pass
  • Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@linear-code
linear-code Bot marked this pull request as ready for review October 27, 2026 01:33
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 27, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-27T01:35:13.930393Z a714fc2 Draft marked ready
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@hyperpolymath
hyperpolymath merged commit 800030f into main Oct 27, 2026
12 checks passed
@hyperpolymath
hyperpolymath deleted the ci/actions-lock-repair branch October 27, 2026 02:00
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Add Carrot credits or activate Agent usage billing to use Autofix

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants