Skip to content

chore: back-merge main into develop - #8

Merged
lorem-dev merged 4 commits into
developfrom
main
Sep 8, 2026
Merged

chore: back-merge main into develop#8
lorem-dev merged 4 commits into
developfrom
main

Conversation

@github-actions

@github-actions github-actions Bot commented Sep 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Automated back-merge of main into develop. Auto-merge is on, so this merges itself once the required checks pass.

Latest commit on main: cf5049c - test: keep the first job busy while the lock test needs it

Triggered by push to main in workflow Back-merge main -> develop run 34261764555.

Merge this with a MERGE COMMIT, not a squash. A squash copies main's content without its history, so git stops knowing that develop already contains it and every later back-merge conflicts on files nobody touched. That is what happened once already; see the comment at the top of .github/workflows/backmerge.yml.

The old workflow opened a pull request and left the merge to a human. The
first one was merged with "squash", which copied main's content into develop
as one ordinary commit and dropped its history. Git then had no way to know
develop already held those changes, so every later back-merge tried to
re-apply 236 commits whose content was already there: 67 conflicting files on
a merge that should have been a formality.

A back-merge carries no decision, so it no longer waits for one. The
workflow fast-forwards develop when develop has nothing of its own, and
otherwise makes the merge commit itself and pushes it. A pull request is
still opened, but only when the work genuinely cannot be done unattended --
a real conflict, or a branch rule refusing the push -- and its body now says
in capitals not to squash it.

develop itself was repaired separately: main merged in with its content
taken throughout, verified byte-identical to main's tree, which lost nothing
because develop carried no work of its own.
The previous commit tried to have the workflow push the merge to develop.
That cannot work: `develop` is protected and refuses pushes outright --
"Changes must be made through a pull request". The attempt is on record in
the run it declined.

So the pull request stays; the person goes. The workflow now turns on
auto-merge with the MERGE method, and GitHub merges the PR once its required
checks pass. Nobody picks a method, so the squash that broke this once
cannot happen by accident. Where auto-merge is unavailable the run warns and
the PR body says, in capitals, not to squash it.

This needed `allow_auto_merge` on the repository, which was off. Permissions
drop to `contents: read`, since nothing pushes any more.
A dependency bump is ordinary work, and ordinary work enters through
`develop` per Branching in CONTRIBUTING.md. Opening them against `main` put
them straight onto the release branch.

Both ecosystems move, npm and github-actions. The one already open against
`main` stays there; Dependabot does not retarget an existing pull request.
This raced, and CI on develop lost the race: the job could finish between
the poll that confirms it is running and the command that expects to be
refused, and then there was nothing to refuse. `--max-cpu 1` gives the first
job a single thread over 57 seconds of audio, which widens the window by
about four times.

The failure now says what the first job was doing. "expected not 0" cannot
tell apart the three ways this goes wrong -- the job finished early, it
died, or the lock was not honoured -- and the CI run that found it recorded
none of that, so the cause is still unknown. Next time it will not be.

The flag reaches the detached child (transcribeChildArgs forwards
--max-cpu), and that it becomes `-t 1` on the engine is asserted in
resources.spec.ts.
@lorem-dev
lorem-dev enabled auto-merge (rebase) September 8, 2026 19:42
@lorem-dev
lorem-dev self-requested a review September 8, 2026 19:44
@lorem-dev
lorem-dev disabled auto-merge September 8, 2026 19:45
@lorem-dev
lorem-dev merged commit 2959ce2 into develop Sep 8, 2026
12 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.

1 participant