Skip to content

docs(create-objectstack): correct a bogus issue reference in the pnpm-build-approvals comments#3125

Merged
os-zhuang merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/fix-bogus-issue-ref
Jul 17, 2026
Merged

docs(create-objectstack): correct a bogus issue reference in the pnpm-build-approvals comments#3125
os-zhuang merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/fix-bogus-issue-ref

Conversation

@os-zhuang

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

#3119 cited #3110 in four comments as the pnpm 11 build-approvals bug. That reference is wrong: #3110 is "ObjectLogger file destination silently no-ops in ESM builds" — unrelated, already closed, fixed by #3116.

The citation was fabricated on my part. The pnpm 11 scaffold breakage was found while diagnosing the red Publish Smoke gate and has no issue of its own, so the correct pointer is the PR that fixed it: #3119.

Why it matters

Comment-only, but it left a wrong pointer in the two places most likely to be read by whoever next touches this:

  • scripts/publish-smoke.sh:51 — the "why is the smoke's pnpm deliberately unpinned" rationale, i.e. the exact spot someone lands on when a future pnpm major turns the gate red.
  • template-consistency.test.ts:80 — the ratchet guarding the template, where the describe name is what shows up in a failing test run.

Following either to #3110 leads to an ESM logger bug and wastes the reader's time.

Verification

  • grep -rn 3110 over scripts/publish-smoke.sh, packages/create-objectstack/, .changeset/ — no remaining references.
  • bash -n scripts/publish-smoke.sh clean; vitest run 13/13.
  • The template pnpm-workspace.yaml and the changeset never cited it, so nothing user-facing shipped with the bad reference.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

…-build-approvals comments

#3119 cited "#3110" in four comments as the pnpm 11 build-approvals bug. #3110 is
an unrelated, already-closed issue — "ObjectLogger file destination silently
no-ops in ESM builds" (fixed by #3116). The reference was fabricated: the pnpm 11
scaffold breakage was found while diagnosing the red Publish Smoke gate and has
no issue of its own, so the correct citation is the PR that fixed it, #3119.

Comment-only. Left a wrong pointer in the two places most likely to be read by
whoever next touches this: the "why is the smoke's pnpm unpinned" rationale in
the script header, and the ratchet that guards the template.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@vercel

vercel Bot commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
spec Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jul 17, 2026 12:42pm

Request Review

@os-zhuang os-zhuang added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Jul 17, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

This PR changes 1 package(s): create-objectstack.

7 hand-written doc(s) reference the affected code and may need an implementation-accuracy re-verification:

  • content/docs/ai/skills-reference.mdx (via create-objectstack)
  • content/docs/ai/skills.mdx (via create-objectstack)
  • content/docs/getting-started/index.mdx (via create-objectstack)
  • content/docs/getting-started/your-first-project.mdx (via create-objectstack)
  • content/docs/plugins/packages.mdx (via create-objectstack)
  • content/docs/releases/v15.mdx (via create-objectstack)
  • content/docs/releases/v9.mdx (via create-objectstack)

Advisory only. To re-verify, run the docs-accuracy-audit workflow scoped to these files:
node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs origin/main → pass the list as args.docs.

@os-zhuang
os-zhuang merged commit 774f8a2 into main Jul 17, 2026
19 of 21 checks passed
@os-zhuang
os-zhuang deleted the claude/fix-bogus-issue-ref branch July 17, 2026 12:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xs skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate tests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant