Skip to content

docs(release): fold [Unreleased] into the shipped v0.8.0 section + resync CLAUDE.md markers - #63

Open
Goosterhof wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
wr-0438-changelog-fold-v0.8.0
Open

docs(release): fold [Unreleased] into the shipped v0.8.0 section + resync CLAUDE.md markers#63
Goosterhof wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
wr-0438-changelog-fold-v0.8.0

Conversation

@Goosterhof

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

v0.8.0 is tagged and live (cut 2026-08-11 at 30c5145 = main HEAD; release workflow green, Packagist serving v0.8.0). This PR is the record repair that the documented release process normally does before tagging:

Why the tag went first

The [0.8.0] changelog section existed since #53 but the tag was never pushed, leaving PR #50's two rules — and later #59's ForbidRawExceptionMessageInResponseRule and #58's receiver-scope fix — uninstallable for four weeks. Branch protection gates commits (code-owner review), not tags; the payload was already ally-reviewed on its way into main, so tagging existing main HEAD required no new commit and no review bypass. Per the pre-1.0 caret convention the tag auto-adopts nobody — every consumer opts in on its own pin-bump PR.

What ships in v0.8.0 (all previously merged, ally-reviewed):

Closes war-room WR-0438; unblocks the WR-0533 / WR-0330 / WR-0270 / WR-0393 adoption waves.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01MTZ3wywzGnCfMkekUcv4fC

…sync CLAUDE.md markers

v0.8.0 was tagged 2026-08-11 at 30c5145 (main HEAD), shipping BOTH pending
payloads: the queue #136/#137 pair (PR #50) the 2026-07-13-dated section
already documented, and the [Unreleased] block on top of it (PR #59
ForbidRawExceptionMessageInResponseRule, PR #58 receiver-scope fix,
queue #112 isSubclassOfClass migration). The tag was cut directly on main
because the branch-protection review gate applies to commits, not tags —
this PR is the record repair the documented release process normally does
before tagging:

- CHANGELOG: [Unreleased] folded into [0.8.0], re-dated to the actual
  release date, intro updated to the full payload; the four stale
  "NOT tagged (release is ally-gated)" claims stripped (one predating
  v0.7.0 — already false for a month).
- CLAUDE.md: seven "on main, [Unreleased] / pending v0.8.0 tag" markers
  resynced to "shipped v0.8.0"; Last-synced stamp updated.

Closes the war-room WR-0438 release-cut row (unblocks WR-0533 / WR-0330 /
WR-0270 / WR-0393 adoption waves; enforcement queue #136/#137/#140).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MTZ3wywzGnCfMkekUcv4fC
@Goosterhof
Goosterhof requested a review from a team as a code owner August 11, 2026 11:19
@Goosterhof Goosterhof added the Agent Review Requested Requesting review of specialized AI review agents. label Aug 11, 2026

@dmooibroek dmooibroek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No findings above the severity gate — eyeball manually.

…der-predicted ~94x

The "known: tc-api EducationController::store/destroy" line was derived
from PR #133's baseline-unmatched residue — only the sites that happened
to be baselined, a sampling bias. Measured on tc-api at v0.8.0: 188
errors across 44 of 118 controllers. Consumers must size the widening
with a discovery pass, not from the changelog (Claim Gate: the artifact
described a blast radius the code does not match).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MTZ3wywzGnCfMkekUcv4fC

@Goosterhof Goosterhof left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚪ Clean (docs-only) — 🔴 1 Major (CI, pre-existing)
Folds [Unreleased] into [0.8.0] and resyncs 7 CLAUDE.md markers to shipped v0.8.0. Verified: tag v0.8.0 == main HEAD 30c5145; every resynced marker line matches an actually-shipped rule; CHANGELOG re-dating and the four stripped **NOT tagged** claims check out against PR history (#50/#53/#56/#58/#59). No diff/body mismatch.
🔴 check (8.4) / check (8.5) / ci-passed red — composer audit flags 6 live league/commonmark advisories (medium/high, reported 2026-08-06), unrelated to this docs-only diff. Confirms rig's prior note: this would fail identically on a main audit re-run today (main's last green predates the advisory feed). Pre-existing/environmental, not introduced here — not this PR's job to fix, but the tag can't get a clean gate until the composer.lock advisory is addressed (own follow-up, not blocking this doc-repair PR).

Automated war-room agent review — posted because this PR carries the Agent Review Requested label.

@dmooibroek dmooibroek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Clean, docs-only (CHANGELOG.md + CLAUDE.md). CI red is pre-existing composer audit advisories on league/commonmark (checked run 31517952468) — unrelated to this diff, would fail on main too. No findings.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Agent Review Requested Requesting review of specialized AI review agents.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants