Fix/actions lock desync - #407
Merged
Merged
Conversation
GitHub refuses a run at startup, creating zero jobs, when a workflow carries a `uses:` ref that the lockfile does not record under that workflow's own path. It matches by LITERAL STRING; `gh actions-lock` matches by resolved commit, so a lock entry naming a tag that dereferences to the pinned SHA passes the tool and still kills the run. Regenerate the lock, make it transitively closed, and add a lock-sync gate carrying no `uses:` of its own so it cannot be disabled by the desync it detects. No workflow YAML is modified. Refs: hyperpolymath/standards#968 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01X3hgXxWm6umMgZkjYyHnnm
A workflow absent from actions.lock can be rejected at startup (startup_failure, jobs=0) even when it carries zero real 'uses:' refs and so has nothing to pin. The gate is deliberately zero-'uses:', which is exactly why it had no entry. Measured on two repos in this batch: adding this single line flipped the gate from 7 consecutive startup_failure runs to success on hyperpolymath/verisimdb (two successes since, nothing else changed) and from 2 of 2 startup_failure to success on hyperpolymath/blocky-writer. Enforcement is not uniform across repos — 13 of the 14 repos in this batch start the byte-identical gate today with the same gap. A repo that passes now is not evidence its lock is complete, only that the behaviour has not reached it. This closes the gap before it bites. Zero-'uses:' workflows take the empty list, matching the entries actions.lock already carries for other zero-'uses:' workflows such as labels.yml. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01X3hgXxWm6umMgZkjYyHnnm
The gate could not defend the fix this PR ships. Clauses 1-3 ask "is every `uses:` locked under its own workflow path?" GitHub asks a DIFFERENT question: "is every workflow FILE represented in the lock?" A workflow with no `uses:` satisfies clauses 1-3 vacuously and GitHub still refuses to start it - which is exactly how lock-sync-gate.yml failed here 7 times running while the checker reported the lock in sync. Thirteen other repositories passed the gate with the same gap present, so a green gate was not evidence of a complete lock. Clause 4 diffs the set of files under .github/workflows/ against the set of lockfile keys, fails on any file with no key, names it, and quotes the empty-list form to add. Remediation step 4 warns that re-running `gh actions-lock` may not fix it, because omitting the file is the tool's own defect. Mutation-tested both ways: deleting the lock-sync-gate key fails the gate, and deleting the unrelated labels.yml key fails it too; the unmutated tree passes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01X3hgXxWm6umMgZkjYyHnnm
…ifier validity bit The ref is NOT required: GitHub does not enforce job-level reusable `uses:` at startup, and the standards verifier explicitly accepts it (`workflow_references_reusable_dependency`). But `gh actions-lock` v0.1.6 still reports it as `stale`, which flips the tool's `valid` bit to false. That moves the tree off the `valid == true` early return and into the finding loop, where the standards SHA pinned here (8f2ee508) has no advisory-category filter -- so PRE-EXISTING `sha-as-ref` advisories are counted as blocking. Measured on bofj-kitt: `governance / Actions lockfile verify` was success on main and failure here, with the same two advisories present in both trees. Removing the ref (and its now-orphaned `dependencies:` record) restores `valid = true` and the early return. Verified offline against the verifier fetched at the PINNED standards SHA: exit 0, matching main. No workflow YAML is touched. Also corrects the lock-sync checker's own documentation: clause 1 is enforced at STEP level only, so the header and success message no longer claim job-level reusable refs are locked (raised in review; the checker's behaviour is unchanged and still kills a mutant). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01X3hgXxWm6umMgZkjYyHnnm
Contributor
|
Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius. ✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
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 |
Signed-off-by: Jonathan D.A. Jewell <6759885+hyperpolymath@users.noreply.github.com>
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
1 participant
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
Closes #
Type of change
How has this been verified?
Checklist
git commit -S).SPDX-License-Identifier(code/configMPL-2.0,prose
CC-BY-SA-4.0); I did not relicense existing files.Notes for reviewers