Reported by the maintainer: the published compliance report for 0.15.0 (pulseengine.eu/reports/rivet/0.15.0/compliance/) has no version selector and no "way back" navigation, both of which 0.1.0 has.
Diagnosis (traced through this repo)
The report generator is intact — nothing was removed:
rivet export --format html still supports --homepage <url> (the "← back" link), --versions '[{label,path},…]' (the version-switcher dropdown), and --version-label (rivet-cli/src/main.rs:603–634). These are written into the report's config.js, which the page reads at runtime.
- The compliance action exposes them as
homepage / other-versions / report-label inputs (.github/actions/compliance/action.yml:199–214), adding the flags only when non-empty.
The regression is that the inputs aren't supplied:
release.yml build-compliance passes none of them (only theme / single-page / include-data-formats), and merely uploads the report as a GitHub artifact — it doesn't publish to pulseengine.eu/reports/.
- The reusable
compliance.yml workflow doesn't even expose other-versions or report-label (only version/homepage/theme/offline) — so any caller using it cannot produce a switcher.
- The actual publishing to
reports/rivet/<ver>/ happens in a separate pulseengine.eu site pipeline (not in this repo). That's the only layer that knows the full version list, so the cross-version switcher must be populated there. The 0.1.0→0.15.0 regression is in that pipeline (it stopped passing --homepage/--versions or writing them into config.js).
Also found
pulseengine.eu's TLS certificate is expired — the report URLs don't load at all (certificate has expired). Worth renewing.
Fix
- Root cause (site repo, not here): when publishing each report, pass
--homepage https://pulseengine.eu/… and --versions '[…all versions…]', then re-run over 0.15.0 (+ back-fill).
- In this repo (ergonomic gaps that make the trap easy) — REQ-163, PR incoming:
- add
other-versions + report-label passthrough inputs to the reusable compliance.yml so a caller can get a switcher;
- give
release.yml's compliance step a default homepage so even the GH-artifact report has a back-link.
Found while answering the maintainer's question during the dogfooding loop.
Reported by the maintainer: the published compliance report for 0.15.0 (
pulseengine.eu/reports/rivet/0.15.0/compliance/) has no version selector and no "way back" navigation, both of which 0.1.0 has.Diagnosis (traced through this repo)
The report generator is intact — nothing was removed:
rivet export --format htmlstill supports--homepage <url>(the "← back" link),--versions '[{label,path},…]'(the version-switcher dropdown), and--version-label(rivet-cli/src/main.rs:603–634). These are written into the report'sconfig.js, which the page reads at runtime.homepage/other-versions/report-labelinputs (.github/actions/compliance/action.yml:199–214), adding the flags only when non-empty.The regression is that the inputs aren't supplied:
release.ymlbuild-compliancepasses none of them (onlytheme/single-page/include-data-formats), and merely uploads the report as a GitHub artifact — it doesn't publish topulseengine.eu/reports/.compliance.ymlworkflow doesn't even exposeother-versionsorreport-label(onlyversion/homepage/theme/offline) — so any caller using it cannot produce a switcher.reports/rivet/<ver>/happens in a separate pulseengine.eu site pipeline (not in this repo). That's the only layer that knows the full version list, so the cross-version switcher must be populated there. The 0.1.0→0.15.0 regression is in that pipeline (it stopped passing--homepage/--versionsor writing them intoconfig.js).Also found
pulseengine.eu's TLS certificate is expired — the report URLs don't load at all (certificate has expired). Worth renewing.Fix
--homepage https://pulseengine.eu/…and--versions '[…all versions…]', then re-run over 0.15.0 (+ back-fill).other-versions+report-labelpassthrough inputs to the reusablecompliance.ymlso a caller can get a switcher;release.yml's compliance step a defaulthomepageso even the GH-artifact report has a back-link.Found while answering the maintainer's question during the dogfooding loop.