docs(ci): record that security updates ignore target-branch - #518
Merged
Conversation
The comment beside the release-smoke directories said updates for them arrived through the default branch because they sat outside every listed directory, which reads as though listing them stops that happening. It does not. Dependabot raises security updates against the default branch whatever target-branch says, so the next advisory touching one of these manifests will open against `main` again, exactly as #514 did. State the rule instead, name the handling it implies — close the PR and carry the bump to `develop` so the branches stay in a fast-forward line — and note that a non-default target-branch also exempts security updates from the `labels` and `commit-message` settings.
The release-smoke note called them "eight deliberately identical setups". They are not: the eight poms carry eight different coordinate combinations — the wrapper, lean core, core plus each render backend, templates, testing, and the bundle — and s2 additionally runs an enforcer dependency-tree assertion the others do not. Read literally, the sentence invites consolidating them, which would delete the coverage they exist to provide. What is identical is the test scaffolding: junit, assertj and surefire are pinned separately in all eight, which is the actual reason a bump has to be applied eight times.
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Why
The comment beside the
release-smokedirectories in.github/dependabot.ymlexplained #514 landing on
mainas a consequence of those paths sittingoutside every listed directory. That reads as though listing them — which
#517 did — stops it happening again. It does not.
Dependabot raises security updates against the default branch whatever
target-branchsays. GitHub states it in the options reference: settinglabels"will also affect pull requests for security updates to the manifestfiles of this package manager, unless you use
target-branchto check forversion updates on a non-default branch", and
commit-messagecarries thesame carve-out. #514 is the observable form of the branch half — a security
update, and the only Dependabot PR ever opened for these manifests, landing
on
mainwhile this file saysdevelop.So the divergence this entry exists to prevent will recur on the next
advisory, and the file currently tells the next reader it cannot.
What
Replaces the wrong cause with the rule and the handling it implies: close
the PR and carry the bump to
developrather than merging it, somainstays a fast-forward of
develop— which is what #517 did.Also records that a non-default
target-branchexempts security updatesfrom the
labelsandcommit-messagesettings, so those PRs arrive underDependabot's defaults and will not match the house style.
The second commit corrects a claim inherited from the comment being
replaced. It called the eight release-smoke projects "deliberately identical
setups"; they are deliberately different — one per published coordinate
combination (wrapper, lean core, core plus each render backend, templates,
testing, bundle), with s2 additionally running an enforcer dependency-tree
assertion the others do not. Read literally the old wording invites
consolidating them, which would delete the coverage they exist to provide.
What is identical is the test scaffolding — junit, assertj and surefire
pinned separately in all eight — and that is the real reason a bump has to
be applied eight times.
Comments only. No option value changes.
Tests
Nothing in the build reads
dependabot.yml, so there is no guard to extendand none was added. A guard could assert the file parses and the keys exist,
but every claim here is about GitHub's behaviour, which no local test can
exercise — it would restate the file to itself and stay green whether or
not the prose is true, which is the failure mode that produced the wrong
comment in the first place.
Verified by parsing the file and asserting every option survived both edits:
version, the fourdirectoriesentries,target-branch: develop,labels,commit-message, and both ecosystem entries are byte-for-bytewhat they were.
git diffis confined to the comment blocks.