Pin umbra v0.185.0 so the value-flag guard reaches the build #1408
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
burndown-2026-06
burndown-2026-08
autonomy
async-consult
autonomy
epic
autonomy
headless
autonomy
live-collab
coherence-core
priority
P0
priority
P1
priority
P2
priority
P3
priority
P4
qa-fixture
role/advocate
role/director
role/exec
role/frontend
role/gamedev
role/human
role/platform
role/qa
role/science
role/sysadmin
state
ambient
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set
Reference
coilyco-flight-deck/agentic-os!1408
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "aos/claude/ee98-pin185"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
umbra#335 taught execverb that a grant guarding
argN/any-argbeside a long flag of unknown arity is a build error, and gave a grantvalue-flagto declare its own. That reaches aosguard only through the pin: specgen embeds its own compiled copy of the generator, so--umbra-refalone never moves it. The same shape made #1366 look landed twice while the shipped binary was unchanged.Both halves move together:
ARG SPECGEN_VERSION0.184.0 -> 0.185.0 picks the generatorspecverb.lockv0.184.0 -> v0.185.0 picks what generated code importsVerified against the real guardfile, not a fixture
Added the exact trap #1351 describes to
can run getinkubectl.kdl:Reverted after measuring. A clean build at the new pin still produces a working binary -
issue pinkeeps its widened<owner> <repo> <index>signature andkubectl getstill fails closed without--context.One thing worth recording
The re-lock reads the vendored specs rather than fetching upstream, so no swagger moved - only
specverb.lockdid. I had assumed on #1377 thatjust aosguard-lockwould refetch every spec and that assumption was wrong. It does not change #1377's conclusion, since the vendored specs are themselves pruned and genuinely lackissueCreateLabel(88 and 66 ops), but I corrected it on that issue.Closes #1351