Skip to content

fix: restore ## Unreleased, which the #224 merge turned into a duplicate v0.149.1 - #225

Merged
bborbe merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix/changelog-restore-unreleased
Sep 27, 2026
Merged

bborbe merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
fix/changelog-restore-unreleased

Conversation

@bborbe

@bborbe bborbe commented Sep 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

One-line repair: restores ## Unreleased, which the #224 merge turned into a second ## v0.149.1 heading.

What went wrong

011556d release v0.149.1 renamed ## Unreleased → ## v0.149.1 for the change in #222, and tag v0.149.1 points at it.

#224 was branched before that release commit, so GitHub's merge had to reconcile two edits to the same region: theirs renamed the section, mine added bullets under it. The merge renamed mine too, and master ended up with:

## v0.149.1      ← #224's bullets (never released)
## v0.149.1      ← #222's bullet (released as the tag)
## v0.149.0

Two consequences, both silent:

The repair

Repair direction is decided by the tag, not by where the merge put the entry. git tag --contains cd3f4953 is empty → this work is in no tag → its bullets move back under ## Unreleased. The sibling's section stays where its tag put it.

## Unreleased
- feat: vault-cli task remove-metrics-session …
- fix: the task-auditor agent's Task-Goal Alignment check …

## v0.149.1
- fix: task-auditor notes a goal link … (unchanged, already tagged)

## v0.149.0

Verification

Merging this should let the release watcher pick the repo up again and cut the next patch.

…ate v0.149.1

Merging #224 renamed its ## Unreleased section to ## v0.149.1, but that heading
already existed: commit 011556d ("release v0.149.1") had renamed the section for
the sibling change in #222, and tag v0.149.1 points at it.

The result on master was two ## v0.149.1 headings, this branch's bullets under
the first, and no ## Unreleased section at all. Because the release watcher keys
on ## Unreleased, it reported reason=no-release-files and skipped the repo — so
this change would never have been released.

Repair direction is decided by the tag, not by where the merge put the entry:
git tag --contains cd3f495 returns nothing, so this work is in no tag and its
bullets move back under ## Unreleased. The sibling's section stays where its tag
put it.

Verified: one ## v0.149.1 heading remains, this branch's two bullets sit under
## Unreleased, the sibling's bullet sits under ## v0.149.1, and the fold guard
prints only '-## v0.149.1' / '+## Unreleased'.

@ben-s-pull-request-reviewer ben-s-pull-request-reviewer Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Selector Mode Review — bborbe/vault-cli PR #225

Changed files: CHANGELOG.md (1 file)

The diff restores ## Unreleased at the top of the changelog, undoing a duplicate ## v0.149.1 that the #224 merge introduced. The two bullets (remove-metrics-session feat, task-auditor goal-link fix) are now correctly under ## Unreleased with ## v0.149.1 below as the last released version.

No code changes — this is a documentation-only bugfix. The mechanical funnel found nothing (0 findings). No agents are applicable.

Version alignment check (CLAUDE.md MANDATORY):

  • CHANGELOG.md top entry: ## Unreleased ✓
  • .claude-plugin/plugin.json version: v0.149.1 (unchanged, this PR doesn't bump it)
  • .claude-plugin/marketplace.json version: v0.149.1 (unchanged)

No version fields changed in this PR — correct, since this is a pure changelog restore.

Plan concerns: Empty — no concerns were raised.

{
  "verdict": "approve",
  "summary": "Trivial but necessary changelog fix: the #224 merge accidentally duplicated the v0.149.1 section header, and this PR restores ## Unreleased as the top section. No code changes.",
  "comments": [],
  "concerns_addressed": []
}

@bborbe
bborbe merged commit 8663363 into master Sep 27, 2026
3 checks passed
@bborbe
bborbe deleted the fix/changelog-restore-unreleased branch September 27, 2026 11:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant