chore: back-merge main into dev (2026-08-11, signed) - #2668
Conversation
Same tree as #2665, collapsed into one signed commit. #2665 cannot merge: it carries three unsigned commits from the content-publish bot (Update content submodule to latest main, 10:05/10:22/10:33Z). The repo's 'All branches' ruleset requires signed commits on every ref and has no bypass actors; the bot reaches main by bypassing it, and a back-merge has no such bypass, so those commits cannot flow into dev by ordinary merge. Trade-off: this loses the merge ancestry, so the next back-merge will see the same delta again. The durable fix is to make the content-publish workflow sign its commits.
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
Comment |
Code-analysis diffPainscore total: 7164.93 → 7161.3 (-3.63) 🆕 New findings (267)
…and 247 more. ✅ Resolved (261)
…and 241 more. 📈 Painscore deltas (top movers)
|
🧪 UI test report — ✅ all greenSuites
📊 Coverage (unit)
⏱ 10 slowest test cases
|
Replaces #2665, which cannot merge.
Why #2665 is stuck. It carries three unsigned commits from the content-publish bot (
Update content submodule to latest main, 10:05/10:22/10:33Z). The repo'sAll branchesruleset (6457257) requires signed commits on every ref and lists no bypass actors. The ruleset audit log shows the bot reachesmainby bypassing that rule; a back-merge PR has no such bypass, so those commits cannot flow intodevthrough an ordinary merge. Every check on #2665 is green — it was never a CI failure.This branch is the same back-merge collapsed into one signed commit, off the current
devtip (so it also includes #2662).Accepted trade-off: squashing loses the merge ancestry, so the next back-merge will present the same delta again. The durable fix is to make the content-publish workflow sign its commits (or author them through the GitHub API, which signs automatically) — filed as a follow-up, not done here.