Skip to content

Conversation

@BYK
Copy link
Member

@BYK BYK commented Jan 9, 2026

Summary

This PR migrates from the deprecated action-prepare-release to the new Craft GitHub Actions.

Changes

  • Migrated .github/workflows/release.yml to Craft reusable workflow

Documentation

See https://getsentry.github.io/craft/github-actions/ for more information.

This PR migrates from the deprecated action-prepare-release to the new
Craft GitHub Actions (reusable workflow or composite action).

Changes:
- Migrate .github/workflows/release.yml to Craft reusable workflow
@BYK BYK requested review from a team and szokeasaurusrex as code owners January 9, 2026 17:59
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 9, 2026

Semver Impact of This PR

🟢 Patch (bug fixes)

📋 Changelog Preview

This is how your changes will appear in the changelog.
Entries from this PR are highlighted with a left border (blockquote style).


Build / dependencies / internal 🔧

  • (release) Switch from action-prepare-release to Craft by BYK in #3069

Other

  • build(npm): 🤖 Bump optional dependencies to 3.1.0 in d0d143c3

🤖 This preview updates automatically when you update the PR.

BYK added 2 commits January 9, 2026 23:08
The previous migration incorrectly removed the GitHub App token
authentication step. This commit restores it by switching to the
composite action pattern which preserves the auth flow.
Comment on lines 7 to 9
permissions:
contents: write
pull-requests: write

This comment was marked as outdated.

@BYK BYK requested a review from a team as a code owner January 10, 2026 01:35
@BYK BYK requested review from chargome and s1gr1d January 10, 2026 01:35
Copy link
Member

@szokeasaurusrex szokeasaurusrex left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We already discussed this over Slack, but please undo these extraneous version comments 🙏 then I will properly review this 😄

BYK and others added 6 commits January 13, 2026 23:14
- Remove changelog-preview.yml as requested by reviewer
- Restore original version comments (remove duplicate # vX # X.Y.Z)
- Restore original formatting and runner in release.yml
- Remove unnecessary permissions from GHCR workflows (keep only packages: write)
Comment on lines 5 to +7
version:
description: Version to release
required: true
description: Version to release (or "auto")
required: false

This comment was marked as outdated.

version: ${{ github.event.inputs.version }}
force: ${{ github.event.inputs.force }}
merge_target: ${{ github.event.inputs.merge_target }}
version: ${{ inputs.version }}
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Bug: The optional version input passes an empty string when omitted, not the "auto" string required by the Craft action for auto-detection, causing release failures.
Severity: HIGH

Suggested Fix

To align the behavior with the description, set a default value for the input: default: "auto". This ensures that if a user omits the version input, the Craft action correctly receives "auto" and triggers the intended auto-detection logic.

Prompt for AI Agent
Review the code at the location below. A potential bug has been identified by an AI
agent.
Verify if this is a real issue. If it is, propose a fix; if not, explain why it's not
valid.

Location: .github/workflows/release.yml#L38

Potential issue: The `version` input in the `release.yml` workflow was changed to be
optional (`required: false`) with a description suggesting that omitting it enables
auto-detection. However, when a user does not provide a value, GitHub Actions passes an
empty string (`""`) to the workflow. The downstream `getsentry/craft` action expects the
literal string `"auto"` to trigger its auto-versioning logic. Since it receives an empty
string instead, the release process will likely fail or behave incorrectly, contrary to
the documented behavior.

Did we get this right? 👍 / 👎 to inform future reviews.

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