Skip to content

chore: update tend workflows (0.1.15 → 0.1.17) - #3822

Merged
max-sixty merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
tend/update-workflows
Aug 15, 2026
Merged

chore: update tend workflows (0.1.15 → 0.1.17)#3822
max-sixty merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
tend/update-workflows

Conversation

@worktrunk-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Automated nightly regeneration of tend's workflow files.

tend version: 0.1.15 → 0.1.17

Notable changes

Compare: max-sixty/tend@0.1.15...0.1.17

@worktrunk-bot worktrunk-bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Regeneration looks clean — the eight files differ from 0.1.15 only in the version pins, the reworked verify pre-check in tend-mention.yaml, and the new eyes-reaction steps. bot_name substitution is complete (the script now reads $BOT_NAME rather than a baked-in login, and the remaining literal worktrunk-bot strings are all in job/step if: expressions, where env isn't available). The new TARGET expressions resolve correctly on every event that can actually reach those steps: issue_comment is the only reachable event with github.event.comment in verify (the issues trigger has no comment, and direct pull_request_review_comment events never pass verify's if:), so the issues/comments/{id} vs pulls/comments/{id} split is right in both branches. The verify reordering is behaviour-preserving on reachable inputs — the one input class where the old and new orders diverge (a bot-authored APPROVED review carrying fresh inline comments on a bot-authored PR) can't occur, since GitHub refuses self-approval.

One thing worth knowing about the new 👀 signal, since it can't be fixed here: in tend-mention.yaml the reaction is added in the verify job but removed in handle, and handle is the only one of the two carrying a concurrency group (tend-mention-handle-<n>). cancel-in-progress: false keeps a running job alive but still evicts a pending one, so a burst of three mentions on the same thread cancels run 2's handle before it allocates a runner — and a job cancelled while queued runs no steps at all, always() included. Run 2's verify has already reacted by then, so that comment keeps a 👀 that says "session in flight" forever. tend-review.yaml and tend-triage.yaml don't have this shape: their add and remove live in the same job, so the reaction can only exist if the job that removes it started. Fix belongs upstream in tend's generator — either move the add into handle, or give verify a matching cleanup path.

Smaller, same file family: the remove steps list reactions with gh api "…/reactions?content=eyes" and no --paginate, so past 30 eyes reactions on a single issue or PR the bot's own could sit on page 2 and never be deleted. Unlikely to bite this repo.

No inline suggestions — these files carry Do not edit this file directly — it will be overwritten on regeneration, so both notes are upstream observations rather than changes to make on this branch. Not approving because this is a self-authored PR, not because of the findings; nothing here blocks the bump.

@worktrunk-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Routed the review's two findings upstream as max-sixty/tend#989 — the stale-👀 path (add in verify, remove in the concurrency-grouped handle, so a handle evicted while pending strands the reaction) and the missing --paginate on the reaction lookup. Both confirmed against the generator templates at max-sixty/tend@205bb4a, with fix options and their tradeoffs.

One correction to the review's second note: it's more likely to bite than "unlikely". tend-review and tend-triage react on issues/<number> — the issue or PR itself, where 30+ 👀 on a busy thread is ordinary — not on a single comment as tend-mention does.

Nothing to change on this branch; these files are generated and the bump is unaffected.

@max-sixty
max-sixty merged commit e3b3482 into main Aug 15, 2026
41 checks passed
@max-sixty
max-sixty deleted the tend/update-workflows branch August 15, 2026 14:55
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