Skip to content

ci: pin the LuCLI runtime to wheels-dev/LuCLI 0.6.2.3 - #4519

Merged
bpamiri merged 1 commit into
developfrom
peter/lucli-0.6.2.3
Oct 9, 2026
Merged

bpamiri merged 1 commit into
developfrom
peter/lucli-0.6.2.3

Conversation

@bpamiri

@bpamiri bpamiri commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Pins the Wheels CLI runtime to the published wheels-dev/LuCLI v0.6.2.3 (release, tag 350ded024).

Changes

  • tools/lucli.json → 0.6.2.3, with the published release's sha256s (they match its checksums_sha256.txt):
    • jar d554249d1d1af2fa8068f3ca945c4261b9741887410e1c9ffc62a7230f70b20f
    • linux/macos 418eebf3843caacacc3a405d51e32a157db8213c1ed1b87ef5b24ebf0148c6f4
  • tools/lucli-tested.json:
  • changelog.d/lucli-0-6-2-3.changed.md: the user-visible changes.

What 0.6.2.3 brings (fork PRs #19, #21-#24, #26-#28)

  • --env / --envfile reach wheels <command>.
  • wheels start --dry-run writes nothing and previews --name.
  • A root option before a root subcommand works (wheels --timing cfml …).
  • REPL history and settings stay in the CLI's home.
  • run <file>.cfm no longer prints the setup.
  • Hints say wheels.
  • The MCP marker that lets develop refuse generate type=app over MCP.

Tested

All runs used the published jar against develop, with an isolated LuCLI home and user.home, and no writes to the real ~/.wheels, ~/.lucli or ~/.lucee:

Suite 0.6.2.2 (current pin) 0.6.2.3
core, Lucee 7 + SQLite (tools/test-local.sh) 7217/7217 7217/7217
CLI suite (tools/test-cli-local.sh) 2437 pass, 0 fail 2437 pass, 0 fail
onboarding harness 36/12/2 36/12/2: the same 12 fresh-home failures (sqlite-jdbc placed after the app server's first boot; a harness gap, tracked separately)
stdio MCP probe generate type=app scaffolds over MCP generate type=app refused over MCP (intended)

The fork's install-validation passed on the published assets on Linux, macOS and Windows.

The Homebrew / Scoop / apt / yum formulas follow separately via release-manager, and 4.1.x formulas stay on 0.6.2.2.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

tools/lucli.json -> 0.6.2.3 with the published release's sha256s (jar
d554249d…, linux/macos 418eebf3…). tools/lucli-tested.json: a 4.2 line
entry for 0.6.2.3, and a note that 4.1 stays at max 0.6.2.2 (0.6.2.3's
MCP marker needs #3980, which 4.1.x lacks).

Tested against develop with the published jar, isolated LuCLI home and
user.home, no writes to the real home: core suite (Lucee 7 + SQLite)
7217/7217, CLI suite 2437 pass 0 fail, stdio MCP probe (17 tools; generate
type=app is now refused over MCP). Same results as 0.6.2.2 except the MCP
refusal, which is the intended fix.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Amiri <peter@alurium.com>
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the docs label Oct 8, 2026
@bpamiri

bpamiri commented Oct 8, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Merge ordering (release-manager, 2026-10-08): homebrew-wheels' stable auto-update currently reads develop's tools/lucli.json, so merging this as-is would make the bot propose LuCLI 0.6.2.3 for the stable (4.1.x) formula. 4.1.x must stay at max 0.6.2.2 (see _notes.4.1 in tools/lucli-tested.json).

  • homebrew-wheels' stable bot uses tools/lucli-tested.json per release line (release-manager) — merge this PR only after that lands

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

@bpamiri

bpamiri commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

rev1-r3 review @ 92249ed: APPROVE (merge held until homebrew-wheels#1100 lands; see the last line)

The pinned SHA-256s are verified two ways:

  • They match the v0.6.2.3 release's checksums_sha256.txt: lucli-0.6.2.3-{linux,macos} = 418eebf3843c…, lucli-0.6.2.3.jar = d554249d1d1a….
  • I downloaded lucli-0.6.2.3-linux, lucli-0.6.2.3-macos and lucli-0.6.2.3.jar and hashed them myself, with the same results.

Provenance:

  • The v0.6.2.3 tag points at 350ded0, the merge commit of build: prepare fork release 0.6.2.3 LuCLI#29 (the 0.6.2.3 release prep I reviewed).
  • The release is not a draft or prerelease, and it is releases/latest.
  • The jar's lucli/version.properties reads lucli.version=0.6.2.3 and lucli.build.commit=350ded0.

tools/lucli-tested.json:

  • The new "4.2": ["0.6.2.3"] and the _notes key don't change how the install smoke reads the file. Its jq reads only .lines[$line].
  • I simulated the resolve and check step with this file:
    • 4.1.2 accepts 0.6.2.1 and 0.6.2.2, and rejects 0.6.2.3;
    • 4.2.0 accepts 0.6.2.3 and rejects 0.6.2.2;
    • an unlisted line accepts its tag pin only.
  • The 4.1 note (max 0.6.2.2, because fix(cli): refuse generate type=app when called over MCP, not only drop it from the schema #3980's __lucliMcpCall handling is 4.2-only) is accurate: v4.1.2 has no handling under cli/lucli.

CI on this head: 17 pass, 2 skipping, 0 fail. The CLI jobs set up the runtime from this pin; the log shows LuCLI Version: 0.6.2.3 (sha256 418eebf3843c…). The full CLI and core suites against the published bytes were run outside CI, per the PR (CLI 2437/0/0, core 7217/7217). MERGEABLE.

INFO: the v4-2-0 installation guide's sample wheels version output still shows Wheels 4.0.3 / LuCLI 0.6.2.2. It is labelled "something like" and was already stale before this PR, so it can be refreshed with the 4.2 docs.

Merge order: this must not merge before wheels-dev/homebrew-wheels#1100 (approved at 18b38a917). Without it, the stable formula's auto-update would take develop's new 0.6.2.3 pin and move the 4.1.2 formula onto a runtime 4.1.x can't run MCP calls on.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Wheels Test Results

36 925 tests   36 190 ✅  12m 55s ⏱️
 2 960 suites     735 💤
     5 files         0 ❌

Results for commit 92249ed.

@bpamiri
bpamiri merged commit be711e6 into develop Oct 9, 2026
31 checks passed
@bpamiri
bpamiri deleted the peter/lucli-0.6.2.3 branch October 9, 2026 00:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant