Files
goodwe-addon/.gitea
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 628279a68a
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m58s
CI-9 follow-up: name the filter that actually gets written, not the one that looks wrong
Three sentences in the blind-spot clause went stale between writing and review.

`no pull request in 99 has ever targeted master` is no longer true: SEC-2 made
`release/1.0` -> `master` the mandated release path and protected `master`
with the same required context, and a PR against that base has run for real.
The census it came from also erases its own evidence - PR #102 was itself
opened against `master` before retargeting, which the /pulls listing no longer
shows, exactly as the caveat 25 lines above this clause warns.

The clause also named `branches: [main]` as the hazard. That is the version
that looks wrong. The one someone would actually write is
`branches: [release/1.0]` - it reads as tightening onto the protected branch,
every day-to-day PR keeps running green, and the only thing it switches off is
the release PR whose content reaches an installed system.

And the prescribed fix named only `release/1.0`'s status_check_contexts. Since
SEC-2 `master` carries the same rule, so a reader following it literally would
half-close the hole and believe it shut.

Guard re-verified against the edited bytes: passes on this file (whose new
prose quotes `branches: [release/1.0]` in a comment) and still refuses a real
filter added to the `on:` block. Comment-only: 0 non-comment lines changed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-23 20:18:50 +02:00
..