Release Manager

Vite+ Release Manager

Run a standard vite-plus release from version bump to published announcement. Any maintainer with repo write access can follow this; the only extra privilege needed is approval rights on the release GitHub environment (step 7).

Usage

/release-manager                    # start a new release: ask for the target version, begin at step 1
/release-manager X.Y.Z              # start a new release for that version
/release-manager <PR URL or #N>     # take over an in-flight release

When given a release PR (URL or number), do not start from step 1. First audit the release's current state, then continue from the earliest unfinished step:

• Is the binding version synced? (step 2: grep -c "'<prev>'" packages/cli/binding/index.cjs on the release branch)
• Is the PR description still the prepare_release boilerplate, or already a categorized changelog? (step 3)
• Is a preview build present and for the current head? (step 4)
• Does main have commits the release branch lacks? (git log origin/release/vX.Y.Z..origin/main, step 5)
• What is CI status? (gh pr checks <PR#>, step 5)
• Already merged? Check the Release workflow (gh run list --workflow Release --repo voidzero-dev/vite-plus) and whether the GitHub release body is still the generated stub, then continue at step 7 or 8.

Report the detected state before making changes, so the previous release manager's work is not redone or overwritten.

Before post-release work, fetch origin/main and read its copy of this skill (git show origin/main:.claude/skills/release-manager/SKILL.md). A checkout left behind after the merge can contain superseded release or announcement instructions.

Pipeline overview

1. Prepare Release workflow bumps versions and opens the release PR (release/vX.Y.Z -> main).
2. Release manager: sync binding/index.cjs, write the changelog PR description, offer the preview-build smoke test (recommend it when the release has more than 10 commits since the previous tag), get CI green.
3. Merging the PR pushes a packages/cli/package.json change to main, which triggers release.yml: build, manual approval gate, npm publish, GitHub release, Docker image, Discord notification.
4. Release manager: polish the GitHub release notes, verify installs, announce.

Canonical sources: .github/workflows/prepare_release.yml, .github/workflows/release.yml, .github/workflows/publish-to-pkg.pr.new.yml.

1. Start the release

gh workflow run prepare_release.yml --repo voidzero-dev/vite-plus -f version=X.Y.Z

The workflow bumps packages/cli/package.json, packages/core/package.json, packages/cli/binding/Cargo.toml, and crates/vp_global_cli/Cargo.toml, refreshes Cargo.lock, and opens a PR titled release: vX.Y.Z from branch release/vX.Y.Z. The PR body ends with Merging this PR will trigger the release workflow. and that line must survive every later edit.

2. Sync the NAPI binding version (required every release)

NAPI bakes the package version into version checks in packages/cli/binding/index.cjs (26+ sites). prepare_release bumps package.json but does not regenerate this file, so CI's Ensure no unexpected file changes after build step in the CLI E2E test job fails until it is synced. Do this immediately; do not wait for CI to fail.

git fetch origin release/vX.Y.Z && git checkout release/vX.Y.Z
grep -c "'<prev>'" packages/cli/binding/index.cjs          # non-zero means sync needed
grep -c "expected <prev> but got" packages/cli/binding/index.cjs

Apply two whole-file text replacements (<prev> is the previous release version, e.g. 0.2.1):

1. '<prev>' -> '<curr>'
2. expected <prev> but got -> expected <curr> but got

Then confirm the replacement took; both counts must now be zero:

grep -c "'<prev>'" packages/cli/binding/index.cjs                 # 0
grep -c "expected <prev> but got" packages/cli/binding/index.cjs  # 0

Do not regenerate via a full build; the text replace is deterministic and byte-identical to what napi build would produce for a version-only bump. Commit with this exact message shape (it makes git log --grep find the sync across releases) and push:

chore(release): sync binding/index.cjs version to <curr>

NAPI bakes the package.json version into binding/index.cjs version
checks. The prepare_release workflow bumps package.json but does not
regenerate this file, so the CI build's regeneration step produces a
diff that the post-build no-unexpected-changes guard rejects.

This is the only kind of commit that goes directly on the release branch. Everything else goes through main (see step 5).

3. Write the release PR description

The release tag does not exist yet, so read release files from the PR head branch and generate notes against main:

git fetch --tags && git tag --sort=-version:refname | head -5   # find <prev>
git log --oneline v<prev>..origin/main
gh api repos/voidzero-dev/vite-plus/releases/generate-notes \
  -f tag_name=v<curr> -f previous_tag_name=v<prev> -f target_commitish=main

git show origin/release/v<curr>:packages/core/package.json          # bundledVersions: vite, rolldown, tsdown
git show origin/release/v<curr>:packages/tools/.upstream-versions.json  # vite/rolldown commit hashes
git show origin/release/v<curr>:pnpm-workspace.yaml                 # vitest/oxlint/oxlint-tsgolint/oxfmt catalog pins

Structure

<One or two sentences on the release theme. Do not repeat the PR title as an opener line; GitHub renders the title directly above the body, and step 8 would only strip it again. When a blog post accompanies the release, read it first (via its preview URL if not yet deployed), align the theme with it, and link the final URL here even if that URL is not live yet.>

### Breaking Changes

### Highlights

### Features

### Fixes & Enhancements

### Refactor

### Docs

### Chore

### Bundled Versions

### Upgrade

### New Contributors

**Full Changelog**: https://github.com/voidzero-dev/vite-plus/compare/v<prev>...v<curr>

---

Merging this PR will trigger the release workflow.

Categorization rules

• Every PR from generate-notes appears exactly once, with one exception: omit bot-authored PRs that carry nothing for a user to read or act on (a docs stats refresh, a badge update). Keep bot PRs that do change what users get, such as the upstream dependency upgrades. When you omit one, say so when reporting the validation counts so the mismatch reads as deliberate rather than missed. No PR is listed both in Highlights and a section below.
• Breaking Changes goes first, above Highlights, and only when the release has one. A rename is breaking only when the old name stops working; if a deprecated alias is retained it is not breaking, so keep the two in different sections rather than merging them into one entry. Give each breaking entry an old -> new table when several names change, plus one line telling readers where to update (shell profile, CI job, Dockerfile). Do not editorialize about the version number.
• When several breaking changes affect different workflows, group them under short #### headings. Explain the changed behavior and required action before each table; keep automatic migration steps separate from changes users must make manually.
• Describe the net change between the two released versions, not intra-cycle churn. When several PRs touch the same area within one release (one narrows a behavior, a later one broadens it back), the reader only sees the delta from v<prev> to v<curr>; describe that once, listing every PR number, and do not narrate a regression that was introduced and then fixed inside the cycle. Apply this to the intro/theme sentence too.
• feat -> Features, fix -> Fixes & Enhancements, refactor and revert -> Refactor (never Chore), docs -> Docs, test / ci / chore -> Chore.
• feat(docs) goes in Docs when the user-facing surface is the docs site.
• Docs means the published docs site, not contributor files. A docs commit that changes an RFC, AGENTS.md, the repo map, or a skill under .claude/ belongs in Chore: a vite-plus user never reads those. Docs should hold only entries a reader could go and look at on the site or in the README.
• Describe behaviour, not resolution logic. An entry states what a user now observes. Rules the implementation follows internally (target-selection signals, config precedence, detection order) belong in the RFC or the PR, not the changelog. If an entry needs a nested list to explain how a decision is reached, cut it down to the outcome.
• A breaking change needs its migration path. State what existing installs or projects do by default, then how to move to the new behaviour deliberately, then what that costs. Link the guide rather than restating it, and say plainly when doing nothing is a valid choice.
• Highlights: 3-5 changes a vite-plus user will notice (new capabilities, security, major fixes). Skip developer-tooling-only conveniences. Each highlight ends with , by @<author>, same as every other entry.
• Entry format: Description ([#N](https://github.com/voidzero-dev/vite-plus/pull/N)), by @author. Describe the user-visible behavior, not the implementation. Group supporting implementation PRs under the user-visible change they enable instead of giving them separate entries. Never include defensive edge cases or internal mechanics unless users need them to use or understand the feature; use concrete behavior instead of internal UI taxonomy that needs extra context.
• Upstream dependency upgrade PRs (feat(deps): upgrade upstream dependencies): consolidate all of them into one Features entry with net oldest-to-latest version changes (e.g. vite 8.0.16 -> 8.1.2), listing every PR number. Check the upgraded range for security fixes (search the upstream changelog for CVE/GHSA); if present, add a dedicated security entry quoting severity and linking the advisory. When oxfmt or oxlint changed version, add one clause telling users the new versions can flag code that passed before, so they should run vp fmt after upgrading if their CI runs vp check; in ecosystem testing this is reliably the largest single class of post-upgrade CI failures.
• vite-task bumps (bump vite-task to <commit>): expand the full rev range (compare Cargo.toml at v<prev> vs the release branch), run git log <old>..<new> in the local vite-task checkout, and read vite-task's CHANGELOG.md at the new commit for wording. Promote user-visible upstream changes into Features / Fixes with [vite-task#N](https://github.com/voidzero-dev/vite-task/pull/N) links, crediting the upstream PR author (gh pr view N --repo voidzero-dev/vite-task --json author). Cross-repo link format is [vite-task#N] / [vite#N], not [owner/repo#N].
• New Contributors: copy from generate-notes, exclude bots (renovate[bot], voidzero-guard[bot], github-actions[bot]), list as inline @mentions.

Bundled Versions table

vite and rolldown are built from pinned commits, so link the commit. The npm-installed tools link to npmx.dev.

Style rules

• No em dashes or en dashes anywhere in the title or body. Use commas, colons, or parentheses.
• Lead the title and opening theme with the most important user-visible behavior. Avoid vague benefit-only wording that the body must explain.
• When naming a package version in prose or a heading, use one inline literal, package@version. Keep separate version columns in tables.
• Link unfamiliar technical abbreviations to the relevant documentation section; keep the short abbreviation as the link text.
• The Upgrade section is a vp upgrade code block.
• Apply via a temp file, never a heredoc (heredoc quoting can escape backticks inside the table and break rendering):

gh pr edit <PR#> --repo voidzero-dev/vite-plus --title "release: vX.Y.Z: <theme>" --body-file /tmp/pr-body.md

Validate before finishing

BODY=$(gh pr view <PR#> --repo voidzero-dev/vite-plus --json body -q '.body')
# every generate-notes PR present (minus any deliberately omitted bot PR), none duplicated:
echo "$BODY" | grep -oE 'voidzero-dev/vite-plus/pull/[0-9]+' | sort -u | wc -l
echo "$BODY" | grep -oE '(vite-plus|vite-task)/pull/[0-9]+' | sort | uniq -d   # must be empty
echo "$BODY" | grep -nE '[—–]'                                                  # must be empty
echo "$BODY" | grep -c '\\`'                                                    # must be 0 (escaped backticks)
echo "$BODY" | tail -1                                                          # boilerplate closing line intact

Diff the body's PR numbers against generate-notes rather than only counting them: a count alone hides one missing entry offsetting one extra. Every number in the missing list must be a bot PR you chose to omit.

4. Preview build smoke test (before merging)

This step runs after the changelog (step 3) is complete and before merging (step 6). Always ask the release manager whether to run it, and ask about both levels explicitly (the local vp migrate sweep, and the fork-PR CI validation below); never silently skip either, and do not add the label on your own.

Decide what to recommend before you ask, by counting the commits the release actually contains:

git rev-list --count v<prev>..origin/main

Recommend running the smoke test when that count is above 10, or when the release touches migrate/create behavior, package-manager or install-path handling, or the native bindings, whatever the count. Recommend skipping only for a release that is both small (10 commits or fewer) and clear of those areas. State the count and your recommendation in the question so the release manager can overrule it, and say roughly what it costs, since the full catalog runs for hours.

If the release manager approves, read and follow vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/.github/TESTING.md first, then validate against the full ecosystem-ci catalog (every runnable fork), not a single project.

If the release manager says yes:

1. Add the preview-build label to the release PR to publish installable 0.0.0-commit.<head-sha> builds through the registry bridge:

   gh pr edit <PR#> --repo voidzero-dev/vite-plus --add-label "preview-build"
   

2. Wait for the Publish preview build workflow run on the release branch to succeed (it packs the built package directories and registers the commit with the registry bridge, then comments the build info on the PR).

3. Verify the build against every runnable project in the catalog with the test-pkg-pr-new-migrate skill: it runs vp migrate from the preview commit against each local checkout, with dependencies resolved through the registry bridge. Report the outcome to the release manager before moving on.

The catalog. The smoke-test catalog and the local-setup rules live in the ecosystem-ci org: vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/.github/TESTING.md, with the machine-readable list in ecosystem.json (each fork's upstream, tracked branch, and package manager). Run every runnable fork; filter ecosystem.json with jq to skip non-JS other repos and any the release manager says to ignore. Forks pinned to the immediately previous release exercise a real upgrade rather than a no-op.

Mandatory: open any test PR against the vite-plus-ecosystem-ci fork, never the upstream repo. gh pr create inside a fork defaults its base repo to the parent (upstream), so pass --repo vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/<repo> (or run gh repo set-default vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/<repo> first). See TESTING.md.

test-pkg-pr-new-migrate needs a local checkout on the fork's tracked branch (often not the default branch, e.g. vue-core tracks minor). Clone under one directory so the whole test environment cleans up in one step:

repo=<repo>; branch=<tracked-branch>   # from ecosystem.json
git clone git@github.com:vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/$repo.git ~/git/github.com/vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/$repo
git -C ~/git/github.com/vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/$repo checkout "$branch"
# ... run the harness against ~/git/github.com/vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/$repo ...
# cleanup after the release: rm -rf ~/git/github.com/vite-plus-ecosystem-ci

The .github repo also ships scripts/setup-local.sh <repo> (or --all), which does the clone, tracked-branch checkout, remotes, and fork base-repo pinning from the manifest in one step.

Sync every fork to upstream before you test anything. The forks drift, often by hundreds of commits, so a checkout straight from origin validates stale code and any PR you open against it carries all that drift instead of just the upgrade. For each fork, fetch source and fast-forward the tracked branch, skipping any fork whose branch has commits upstream does not have rather than clobbering it:

git -C "$dir" fetch source
git -C "$dir" rev-list --left-right --count "origin/$branch...source/$branch"   # left must be 0 to fast-forward
git -C "$dir" push --no-verify origin "source/$branch:refs/heads/$branch"

Do this before both the local sweep and the fork PRs. If PRs were already opened against a stale base, GitHub will not recompute their merge base when the base branch moves; close and reopen each one to force it (a reopened draft stays a draft). TESTING.md carries the full procedure.

Validate in the project's own CI. Beyond the local vp migrate, exercise the prerelease in the fork's real CI by opening a draft PR on the fork, following "Smoke-test via a fork PR" in TESTING.md: branch update-vite-plus-prerelease-test-<version> synced from source, apply the upgrade, open a draft PR on the fork (never upstream) assigned to the release manager, then watch its checks for upgrade-related failures. Offer this alongside the local sweep rather than treating it as an afterthought; it is the only level that exercises each project's own build and tests. Some projects' CIs install with a non-standard tool that cannot resolve preview builds through the bridge .npmrc (e.g. cnpmcore's utoo), so check the install step before trusting fork-CI results.

The workflow triggers only on the labeled event, not on new pushes. To rebuild after the head moves (e.g. after a step 5 merge from main), remove and re-add the label (this cancels an in-flight build for the branch). A stale build whose diff to the new head is test-only is still valid for smoke testing; ask before re-triggering.

Example (v0.2.2, PR #2016)

Changelog complete, CI green, release manager approved the smoke test. A build existed for head 06708538; the head had since moved by a test-only merge from main, so that build was still valid and was not re-triggered.

Here the target was vibe-dashboard main (a vite-plus-ecosystem-ci fork, pnpm monorepo on vite-plus 0.2.1, i.e. the previous release), so the run exercised the common upgrade path. Pass the release PR number; the harness resolves it through the bridge to the latest published immutable commit and prints the resolved SHA (confirm it matches the build you expect). Pass a full commit SHA instead only to pin a specific build when several have been published:

.github/scripts/test-pkg-pr-new-migrate.sh 2016 ~/git/github.com/vite-plus-ecosystem-ci/vibe-dashboard --no-interactive

A passing run looks like:

◇ Updated . to Vite+ 0.0.0-commit.06708538...
• Dependencies:
    vite-plus  0.2.1 → 0.0.0-commit.06708538...
    vite             → 8.1.2
✓ Dependencies installed in 5.7s

Migration worktree changes (.npmrc force-staged so it survives .gitignore):
A  .npmrc                      # bridge registry written by vp migrate
 M package.json / pnpm-workspace.yaml / pnpm-lock.yaml

Found 1 version of @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core
Found 1 version of vite-plus
Found 1 version of vitest

Pass criteria: the upgrade lands on the 0.0.0-commit.<sha> build, the install succeeds through the bridge registry, and each of @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core, vite-plus, and vitest resolves to exactly ONE version (vitest at the bundled upstream version). Multiple or stale versions mean the migration or install is broken: stop and treat it as a release blocker. Report the outcome to the release manager either way.

Triaging failures across the catalog

Across the full catalog most failures are not regressions, and reporting them as "N failed" without triage is useless to the release manager. Sort every failure into one of these before drawing any conclusion:

• Registry-bridge fetch flakes. Check these first, because they are common and they masquerade as something far worse. The bridge drops tarball requests under load: pnpm logs error (23). Will retry, or the install dies with ECONNRESET aborted. The dangerous case is a platform binding, because @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-<platform> is an optional dependency: when its download exhausts the retries, the installer skips it and still reports success, and the job then fails much later at the first command that loads the binding, with Cannot find native binding / Cannot find module '@voidzero-dev/vite-plus-linux-x64-gnu'. That is a local node_modules resolution failure and says nothing about the registry, but NAPI's loader appends generic "npm has a bug related to optional dependencies" boilerplate that reads like a publishing problem. Do not conclude the addon was unpublished; the bridge publishes every platform package for every commit build. Confirm, then re-run:

  curl -s "https://registry-bridge.viteplus.dev/@voidzero-dev%2fvite-plus-linux-x64-gnu" \
    | python3 -c "import json,sys; print('0.0.0-commit.<sha>' in json.load(sys.stdin)['versions'])"
  gh run rerun <run-id> --failed --repo <owner>/<repo>
  

  Grep every failing log for error (23) and ECONNRESET before classifying it as anything else. In one release this single cause accounted for 8 fork failures, all of which passed on re-run.

• Preview-build artifacts. These are caused by the 0.0.0-commit.<sha> version string itself and cannot happen for a real npm release, so they are never blockers. The recurring ones: pnpm ERR_PNPM_TRUST_DOWNGRADE ("possible package takeover"), npm ETARGET from a before/min-release-age policy, bun minimum release age, ERR_PNPM_INVALID_PEER_DEPENDENCY_SPECIFICATION when a project declares vite as a peer (migrate writes the npm:@voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core@... alias there), ERR_PNPM_TARBALL_URL_MISMATCH or a failed supply-chain policy check against the bridge tarball URLs, and Docker builds whose context does not carry the bridge .npmrc.

• Pre-existing failures. Prove it rather than asserting it, with whichever control is cheaper: install the previous release into an isolated home and re-run the same command, or check whether the fork's base branch CI already fails. The isolated-home control is the highest-value technique in this step, since it converts a scary-looking failure into a one-line fact:

  VP_HOME=$HOME/.cache/vp-control-<prev> VP_VERSION=<prev> VP_NODE_MANAGER=no bash packages/cli/install.sh
  cd <project> && VP_HOME=$HOME/.cache/vp-control-<prev> VP_NODE_MANAGER=no \
    PATH="$HOME/.cache/vp-control-<prev>/bin:$PATH" vp migrate <project> --no-interactive
  

  Run the control from inside the project directory. Launching it from the vite-plus checkout makes vp delegate to that checkout's packages/cli/dist instead of the pinned release, which silently invalidates the comparison (it fails with an unrelated error such as Fail to parse yaml as RuleConfig).

  Run candidate and control in isolated checkouts of the same project base, starting with the same lockfile and no node_modules. Compare any lockfile changes made by migration so unrelated dependency versions do not invalidate the control. When the control reproduces the failure, report the evidence (same exit code and error class).

• Stale pins: weight the forks that were actually on the previous release. A fork pinned several releases back does not test the release under review at all; vp migrate performs a multi-release jump, and any resulting type errors are evidence about that jump. Before drawing a conclusion, work out what each fork was on and judge the release primarily on the forks upgrading from the immediately previous release. Derive the pin from the upgrade commit itself, not from HEAD, since later commits on the test branch hide it:

  sha=$(git -C <dir> log --format=%H --grep='^test: upgrade vite-plus to prerelease' -n 1)
  git -C <dir> show "$sha" | grep -E '^-.*vite-plus'
  

  Report that subset separately; "2 of the 7 forks on the previous release pass, the other 5 fail on fork infrastructure" is a far stronger statement than a headline pass rate over the whole catalog.

• Project-side and infra failures. Dependency conflicts between the project's own packages, missing fork secrets, third-party GitHub Apps not installed on the fork, network timeouts. Retry once before classifying anything as a network failure; they pass on retry. Two recurring shapes worth naming: a package that imports a dependency it never declared and only ever resolved through hoisting (Cannot find package 'oxfmt') breaks as soon as the harness regenerates the lockfile; and a project whose own dependency has no main/module/exports cannot load its config under any vite-plus version.

• Dependency drift during migration. Regenerating a lockfile can move unrelated floating or nightly dependencies to incompatible versions. Compare with the base lockfile before blaming the candidate. On the test branch, retain the original versions and their dependency graph, then verify a frozen install and rerun the failing command.

• Harness artifacts. Failures your own test setup caused, such as a lockfile the harness deleted and the install never regenerated. Fix these and re-run rather than reporting them.

Report the tally by cause, not just pass/fail, and state plainly which failures you controlled for and which you classified from the error text alone. Only a failure that reproduces on the candidate but not on the previous release is a regression.

When repairing timing-sensitive smoke tests, keep their assertions and make readiness or timing deterministic. Use a negative control when changing how a test observes behavior: temporarily remove or break that behavior, confirm the test fails, and restore it before committing.

Two long-run mechanics worth knowing: vp migrate installs Vite+ git hooks in the project, so any later git commit/git push there needs --no-verify; and macOS has no GNU timeout, so a driver script that time-boxes runs needs its own watchdog. If that driver runs projects in parallel, kill the whole process tree on timeout, not just the wrapper: an orphaned pnpm install holds the store lock and the next project then hangs at 0% CPU with no output, which reads like a vite-plus hang and is not one.

Two fork-CI blockers are worth fixing rather than reporting, both on the test branch only so the tracked branch stays clean against upstream. A fork whose workflows never trigger on pull_request reports "no checks" and proves nothing: add a minimal workflow that runs vp run build through whatever setup the project already uses. A fork whose workflows target third-party runners (self-hosted labels such as blacksmith-*) queues every job forever, because those labels only resolve for the upstream org: map them to GitHub-hosted equivalents, replacing the longest label first so an -arm suffix is not left half-rewritten. Runner-specific actions need more than a label swap and are usually not worth fixing.

5. Release-branch CI

Match checks to the current PR head and the latest applicable workflow runs. Superseded canceled runs can leave failed aggregate checks in the PR rollup. Check required statuses with gh pr checks <PR#> --required, and report required reviewer approval separately from technical CI readiness.

Fixes for CI failures go through a separate PR to main, never as commits on the release branch (the binding sync in step 2 is the sole exception). After the fix PR merges:

git checkout release/vX.Y.Z && git merge origin/main --no-edit && git push origin release/vX.Y.Z

Do not assume the merge brought in only the fix PR: main may have accumulated several. Before merging, list everything that will come in with git log origin/release/vX.Y.Z..origin/main --oneline, then add a changelog entry for every newly included PR and rerun the step 3 validation (its missing/extra diff against generate-notes catches any entry you missed).

Known release-branch-only failure modes:

• Binding version drift: CI's no-unexpected-changes guard reports a diff flipping version strings in binding/index.cjs. Fix: step 2.
• Registry flakes: registry-bound fixtures can time out (about 50s) and look like regressions. Rerun before diagnosing, and never commit a [timeout] snapshot.

6. Merge

Merging the release PR is the release trigger. Before merging confirm: CI green, changelog validated, binding synced, and (if used) the preview build verified.

Auto-merge being enabled is not a completed merge. Confirm mergedAt and the merge commit, then follow the Release run for that commit; older successful runs can have skipped publishing because the version did not change.

7. Automated release pipeline (what happens after merge)

release.yml runs on the main push because packages/cli/package.json changed:

1. check: compares the local version against unpkg.com/vite-plus@latest; everything below is skipped unless it changed.

2. build-rust: full multi-platform build.

3. request-approval: posts an approval request to the releases Discord channel, and the Release job waits on the release GitHub environment. A person with environment approval rights must approve the run in the Actions UI. The environment sets prevent_self_review: true, so whoever merged the release PR triggered the run and cannot approve it: a different reviewer must. Check who can, and tell the release manager rather than leaving them waiting on themselves:

   gh api repos/voidzero-dev/vite-plus/actions/runs/<run-id>/pending_deployments \
     -q '.[] | "\(.environment.name) can_approve=\(.current_user_can_approve) reviewers=\([.reviewers[]?.reviewer.login] | join(","))"'
   

4. Release: publishes the platform-native CLI packages (@voidzero-dev/vite-plus-cli-<platform>, via packages/cli/publish-native-addons.ts) and then @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core and vite-plus to npm (--tag latest), creates the vX.Y.Z GitHub release (draft, with installer/binary assets, then undrafted). The generated body has only Published Packages and Installation sections.

5. publish-docker: multi-arch toolchain image to ghcr.io/voidzero-dev/vite-plus, after npm publish (the image installs vp from npm).

6. deploy-docs: deploys the production docs after a stable release is published.

7. discord-notify: announces to Discord after Docker publishing and docs deployment succeed (docs are skipped for prereleases).

A green Release job does not mean the packages are installable. pnpm publish prints ✅ Published package <name>@X.Y.Z as soon as the registry accepts the request, and the registry can then take tens of minutes to actually serve that version. This has shipped a broken release: vite-plus@X.Y.Z went live on latest with an exact dependency on @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core@X.Y.Z that was invisible for about 35 minutes, so every npm install vite-plus failed with ETARGET and both publish-docker and Deploy docs failed on ERR_PNPM_NO_MATCHING_VERSION. The downstream job failures are the symptom, not the cause; do not re-run them until the registry has the package.

Check visibility directly, not through npm view, which caches:

for pkg in '@voidzero-dev%2Fvite-plus-core' 'vite-plus'; do
  curl -s -H 'Cache-Control: no-cache' "https://registry.npmjs.org/$pkg?t=$(date +%s)" |
    python3 -c "import json,sys;d=json.load(sys.stdin);print('$pkg', d['dist-tags'].get('latest'), 'X.Y.Z' in d['versions'])"
done

Both must report True before you trust the release. A stale modified timestamp on the packument is the giveaway that nothing landed. If vite-plus is visible and core is not, the release is broken right now for every new install: tell the release manager immediately and offer to move the tag back (npm dist-tag add vite-plus@<prev> latest) while the publish is sorted out. Confirm the fix with a real install in a temp directory, not just a registry read:

d=$(mktemp -d); cd "$d" && npm init -y >/dev/null && npm install vite-plus@X.Y.Z --no-audit --no-fund

8. Post-release

1. Polish the GitHub release notes (ask first): the auto-created release body has only Published Packages and Installation. Build the polished notes from the final release PR body:

   • Drop the closing --- / Merging this PR ... boilerplate.

   • Preserve every changelog section through Full Changelog, including any later revisions requested by the release manager.

   • Append the generated Published Packages and Installation sections, omit the redundant View the full commit line, and end Installation with a Docker usage block (keep the explanation to one short sentence):

     **Docker:**
     
     ```bash
     docker run --rm -it -v "$PWD:/app" -w /app ghcr.io/voidzero-dev/vite-plus:X.Y.Z vp build
     ```
     
     Run any `vp` command without installing it; see the [Docker guide](https://viteplus.dev/guide/docker) for more.
     

   • Present the draft to the release manager and apply only after approval. Before review, write the complete draft to a temporary Markdown file with the proposed release title at the top and the full body below it. Update that file after every requested revision; do not treat chat excerpts as the canonical draft. After approval, use a body-only notes file (without the review title) to retitle the release and apply the notes:

     gh release edit vX.Y.Z --repo voidzero-dev/vite-plus \
       --title "vite-plus vX.Y.Z: <theme>" --notes-file /tmp/release-notes.md
     

   • Keep the review draft, body-only notes file, and live release aligned after requested edits. Read back the live title and body to verify the update. Re-run the step 3 validation greps, plus grep -c 'Merging this PR' (must be 0).

2. Verify:

   npm view vite-plus version                       # X.Y.Z
   npm view @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core version    # X.Y.Z
   npm view @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-cli-darwin-arm64 version   # X.Y.Z, spot-check a native platform package
   npm view vite-plus dist-tags.latest              # X.Y.Z
   docker run --rm ghcr.io/voidzero-dev/vite-plus:X.Y.Z vp --version
   

   vp upgrade requires a standalone installation; vp update is not a substitute because it updates project dependencies. Resolve the intended binary and query its roots with VP_DUMP_DIRS=1; installations can use split XDG/platform roots, an explicit VP_HOME, or the legacy ~/.vite-plus directory. Remove temporary overrides left by preview/control runs, while preserving the intended installation's configuration.

   If the user's installation points to local-dev-* or is managed by another tool, test an isolated copy of the previous published installation under an explicit VP_HOME. Repoint any absolute symlinks in the copy to the copied root before testing. Label the result as an isolated upgrade; preserve the development installation and the original control used for regression tests. Run the selected binary outside a project so a local CLI cannot take over:

   release_vp=/absolute/path/to/vp
   release_data=$(VP_DUMP_DIRS=1 "$release_vp" | awk -F '\t' '$1 == "data" { print $2 }')
   test -n "$release_data"
   readlink "$release_data/current"
   "$release_vp" upgrade
   readlink "$release_data/current"   # must select the target release
   "$release_vp" --version
   

   Require the target version directory, the expected current link, and vp --version output; a success message alone is insufficient. Already up to date passes only when the selected installation is already on the target version.

   The Docker check must run vp --version inside the image, not just pull it: the output must report vp vX.Y.Z. Outside a project that output lists no bundled tools, so inspect the installed image package tree under ~/.vite-plus/X.Y.Z/node_modules/.pnpm and confirm the bundled tool packages and versions match the changelog's Bundled Versions table. tsdown will be absent from that tree because it is bundled into @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core; verify it with npm view @voidzero-dev/vite-plus-core@X.Y.Z bundledVersions --json instead. If no local Docker runtime is available, confirm publish-docker succeeded and inspect the GHCR manifest for both linux/amd64 and linux/arm64. For the current stable release, confirm the version tag and latest have the same digest. Record each architecture's vp --version output from the Docker build logs when available, and distinguish that evidence from a local run:

   TOKEN=$(curl -s "https://ghcr.io/token?scope=repository:voidzero-dev/vite-plus:pull" \
     | python3 -c "import json,sys; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['token'])")
   curl -sI -H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN" \
     -H "Accept: application/vnd.oci.image.index.v1+json" \
     "https://ghcr.io/v2/voidzero-dev/vite-plus/manifests/X.Y.Z" | head -1   # HTTP/2 200
   

3. Announce on Discord (concise format). Keep it tight: every line is a single short phrase, no heading-plus-explanation sentences, the whole message around 20 lines. No PR links, no tables, no per-entry credits, no em dashes. Make the theme and highlights self-contained by naming the affected capability rather than using vague benefit-only wording. Use verbs that match the actual behavior, especially distinguishing guidance or suggestions from automatic actions. One emoji per line by theme (:lock: security, :zap: performance, :sparkles: DX, :seedling: scaffolding, :hammer_and_wrench: tooling, :package: deps). Use Upstream Upgrades for dependency/tool version bumps, not Highlights, and list only tools whose version actually changed. Leave the full Bundled Versions table in the linked release notes rather than repeating it in the announcement. A security fix caused by a dependency bump can still have a Highlight focused on the vulnerability, and

…(truncated)