Skip to content

Release v3.0.2 - #9

Merged
ecrum19 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
release/v3.0.2
Sep 12, 2026
Merged

ecrum19 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
release/v3.0.2

Conversation

@ecrum19

@ecrum19 ecrum19 commented Sep 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Why 3.0.2 and not 3.0.1

3.0.1 was published to PyPI from commit 5b4b8e9 — 55 commits behind main,
dated 2026-06-02. The tag pointed at June work, so the published artifact was
three months of regressions wearing a 3.0.1 label. It has been yanked, and PyPI
reserves a version permanently once uploaded, so 3.0.1 can never be re-published.

The Docker half was caught mid-run and cancelled before it pushed, so Docker Hub
was never written to — latest is still the v2.1.0 image.

No code changes here. This is exactly the v3.0.1 content — the
multi-architecture Docker build fix, the QLever digest pin, and the idempotent
PyPI publish — under a version number that can actually be published.

How the mis-tag published silently

GitHub Actions runs the workflow file from the tagged commit. June's
publish-python had a "Sync release metadata from tag" step that rewrote the
version to match the tag, so it relabelled old code as 3.0.1 and uploaded it
without complaint.

main already replaced that with scripts/release.py --check-tag, which
validates committed metadata against the tag. Tagging the wrong commit now
fails the build instead of shipping. That guard is in this branch's base and is
what makes a repeat of this failure loud.

Verification

Everything below was run against this branch, not assumed.

Check Result
scripts/release.py --check-tag v3.0.2 metadata agrees
All six version markers 3.0.2; conda sha256 reset to placeholder
Unit suite 641 tests, OK
python -m build 3.0.2 wheel + sdist
twine check PASSED
sdist contents 0 test files (MANIFEST.in prune working)
wheel contents 23 entries, all 5 top-level modules, deps correct
Fresh venv install version 3.0.2; all three console scripts run
META fix in installed package Values=[a, b, c] → ['a','b','c']
docker buildx --platform linux/amd64,linux/arm64 exit 0, both platforms through all 24 steps
QLever link check no warnings on either architecture
Stale 3.0.1 references none
Relative markdown links none broken

Tagging — please verify before pushing

The previous release failed because the tag was created on the wrong commit.
Create it against an explicit SHA and confirm it before pushing:

git fetch origin
git tag -a v3.0.2 <merge-commit-sha> -m "VCF-RDFizer v3.0.2"
git log -1 --oneline v3.0.2          # must be the merge of this PR
python3 scripts/release.py --check-tag v3.0.2   # must pass on that commit
git push origin v3.0.2

If --check-tag fails, the tag is on the wrong commit — do not push it.

After the release lands, record the conda checksum:

python3 scripts/release.py 3.0.2 --fetch-conda-sha256

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

3.0.1 was published to PyPI from a commit 55 behind main: the tag pointed at
2026-06-02 work, so the artifact was three months of regressions labelled 3.0.1.
It has been yanked, and PyPI reserves a version permanently once uploaded, so
this releases 3.0.2 from the correct commit instead.

No code changes. This is the v3.0.1 content -- the multi-architecture Docker
build fix, the QLever digest pin, and the idempotent PyPI publish -- under a
version number that can actually be published.

The mis-tag published silently because GitHub Actions runs the workflow from the
tagged commit, and that June workflow rewrote the version to match the tag
rather than checking it. This commit's publish-python validates instead, via
`scripts/release.py --check-tag`, so a tag on the wrong commit now fails the
build rather than shipping.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@codecov-commenter

Copy link
Copy Markdown

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

@ecrum19
ecrum19 merged commit b8da2ed into main Sep 12, 2026
24 checks passed
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