Skip to content

Conversation

@bolinfest
Copy link
Collaborator

@bolinfest bolinfest commented Feb 7, 2026

Given that we have #10977, the existing "Verify config schema fixture" step seems unnecessary. Further, because it happens as part of the tag-check job (which is meant to be fast), it slows down the entire build process because it delays the more expensive steps from starting.

Copy link
Contributor

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 77e6c740e8

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".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines 45 to 46
echo "✅ Tag and Cargo.toml agree (${tag_ver})"
echo "::endgroup::"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P2 Badge Keep schema fixture validation in release tags

Removing the config schema verification step in the tag-check job means a release can succeed even if codex-rs/core/config.schema.json is stale. Since this workflow later copies that file into the release artifacts (cp codex-rs/core/config.schema.json dist/config-schema.json around line 478), a tag that updates ConfigToml but forgets to regenerate the schema will now silently publish an outdated schema to users. This regression depends on a config change landing without running just write-config-schema, which the removed guard previously caught.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@bolinfest bolinfest requested a review from sayan-oai February 7, 2026 06:46
etraut-openai pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2026
I did not wait for CI on #10980
because it was blocking an alpha release, but apparently it broken the
Windows build.
caseychow-oai pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2026
I did not wait for CI on #10980
because it was blocking an alpha release, but apparently it broken the
Windows build.
@bolinfest bolinfest merged commit 91a3e17 into main Feb 8, 2026
32 checks passed
@bolinfest bolinfest deleted the pr10980 branch February 8, 2026 16:49
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 8, 2026
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants