docs(release): trim the signing archaeology now the path is proven - #3593
Merged
Conversation
The comments were written while the mechanism was still being guessed at, so they carried the failed attempts. v0.69.2 shipped a signed binary and the workflow verifies itself, so the reader needs the current mechanism, not the history of arriving at it. Records the one thing the code can't show: the checksum step is deliberately not continue-on-error, unlike every signing step around it, and so must not be folded into the replace step it looks redundant beside. Shipping unsigned is tolerable on a test certificate; shipping a checksum that doesn't match the zip is not.
worktrunk-bot
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow-up to #3590, now that v0.69.2 has shipped a signed Windows binary — verified against the published asset rather than the logs:
Comments only; no behavior change.
The signing comments were written while the mechanism was still being guessed at, so they carried the failed attempts — a ten-line account of the zip-of-a-zip failure, a six-line account of the
…zip.zipcollision. The path is proven and the workflow now verifies itself, so what a reader needs is the current mechanism. Trimmed to that.One thing added rather than removed.
Recompute checksumsits between twocontinue-on-errorsteps and looks like it should fold into the replace step above it. It must not: the signing steps are tolerant because publishing can't depend on a self-signed test certificate, while a checksum that doesn't match the shipped zip has to fail the release. That asymmetry is invisible in the YAML, so it's now stated — the next person to simplify this shouldn't have to rediscover it.