Skip to content

Production merge: v0.12 SDK and some other changes - #229

Merged
lindydonna merged 5 commits into
productionfrom
master
Apr 27, 2018
Merged

Production merge: v0.12 SDK and some other changes#229
lindydonna merged 5 commits into
productionfrom
master

Conversation

@lindydonna

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

justinvp and others added 5 commits April 24, 2018 13:54
To allow updating the Pulumi Console's Dashboard cards faster than going through the normal testing->staging->production deployment of the service, and since these particular cards are docs-focused, we'll host this JSON file on the docs site and have the Console request it from the browser.

For now, News will be a list of recent releases with links to the changelog, but eventually we'll want to change it so it's sourced from the Pulumi blog (via JSON Feed or RSS).
* Update quickstarts, installer, and reference docs for 0.12 release. 

* Add changelog for v0.12 and minor fixes. Closes #116, #221

* Add an explicit style for H4
@lindydonna
lindydonna merged commit 5de8867 into production Apr 27, 2018
CamSoper added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 3, 2026
Fork PR #229 shipped four correct ✏️ marks that the workflow did not
write — the log read `marked 0 style bullet(s)`. The editorial pass had
added them itself, mid-line, and the annotator's idempotency guard then
saw a mark already present and skipped every bullet.

They matched what posted, but only by luck: the model staged four and all
four survived validation. A mark it writes for an entry later dropped by
the blocker-line filter, an anchor mismatch, or the cap would promise a
one-click button that isn't there — the exact failure the mark exists to
prevent, and the same shape as the forgeable [style-blocker] marker.

annotate_draft now strips every existing mark from style bullets first
and re-applies only for entries the GitHub API accepted, so a
model-authored mark is corrected rather than trusted. Its return value is
now "marks present" (final state) rather than "newly added"; the
idempotency test asserts the body is byte-identical on a second pass.

The CI review prompt and ci.md now say plainly not to write the mark, and
why the model can't know which entries survive. The deterministic
overwrite is the guarantee; the prompt just stops the wasted effort.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01RNTs4JzMiG36mQ2ChAyLF4
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.

3 participants