Grey.ooo/agent-standards
Watch
2
0
Fork
You've already forked agent-standards
 0
Code Issues 2 Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Repoint the [skip ci] link at the heading it was renamed to #12

Merged
geusebio merged 1 commit from docs/fix-dangling-skip-ci-anchor into main 2026-08-07 10:39:25 +00:00
Conversation 0 Commits 1 Files changed 1 +1 -1
geusebio commented 2026-08-07 10:39:12 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

#6 and #11 merged clean and left a dangling link between them.

  • #6 added a cross-reference to
    #skipping-ci-on-docs-only-commits (line 69, in Scope the gate to the diff).
  • #11 renamed that heading to
    Skipping CI on docs-only changes, because it now covers pull requests as well as
    commits.

Neither PR touched the other's lines, so git merged both without a murmur and produced a
link to an anchor that does not exist. Both were mergeable against main individually, and
still conflicted semantically — the ordinary case for prose, where the unit of meaning is a
section and the unit of merge is a line.

markdownlint's MD051/link-fragments catches it:

docs/Topics/VCS.md:69:25 MD051/link-fragments Link fragments should be valid
  [Context: "[`[skip ci]`](#skipping-ci-on-docs-only-commits)"]

This repo runs no CI, so nothing did. someones.computer lints its own Markdown in the
Lint job but sees this submodule as a gitlink, not as files — so a broken link in here
reaches main in both repos unremarked. Worth its own issue if it recurs; not fixed in this
one-line change.

The two sections agree in substance, incidentally — #6's "nothing outside docs/, *.md and
images" and #11's "*.md, *.markdown and docs/**" describe the same boundary, which is
also what scripts/docs-only-change.sh implements. Only the link was wrong.

markdownlint clean on the changed file apart from a pre-existing MD040 at line 116 (a bare
fence in the commit-message examples), which predates all three PRs.

Pure docs, so not a draft — the rule #11 just added.

`#6` and `#11` merged clean and left a dangling link between them. - [#6](https://git.grey.ooo/Grey.ooo/agent-standards/pulls/6) added a cross-reference to `#skipping-ci-on-docs-only-commits` (line 69, in *Scope the gate to the diff*). - [#11](https://git.grey.ooo/Grey.ooo/agent-standards/pulls/11) renamed that heading to **Skipping CI on docs-only *changes***, because it now covers pull requests as well as commits. Neither PR touched the other's lines, so git merged both without a murmur and produced a link to an anchor that does not exist. Both were mergeable against `main` individually, and still conflicted semantically — the ordinary case for prose, where the unit of meaning is a section and the unit of merge is a line. `markdownlint`'s `MD051/link-fragments` catches it: ```text docs/Topics/VCS.md:69:25 MD051/link-fragments Link fragments should be valid [Context: "[`[skip ci]`](#skipping-ci-on-docs-only-commits)"] ``` **This repo runs no CI**, so nothing did. `someones.computer` lints its own Markdown in the `Lint` job but sees this submodule as a gitlink, not as files — so a broken link in here reaches `main` in both repos unremarked. Worth its own issue if it recurs; not fixed in this one-line change. The two sections agree in substance, incidentally — #6's "nothing outside `docs/`, `*.md` and images" and #11's "`*.md`, `*.markdown` and `docs/**`" describe the same boundary, which is also what `scripts/docs-only-change.sh` implements. Only the link was wrong. `markdownlint` clean on the changed file apart from a pre-existing `MD040` at line 116 (a bare fence in the commit-message examples), which predates all three PRs. Pure docs, so **not a draft** — the rule #11 just added.
#6 and #11 merged clean and left a dangling link between them. #6 added a
cross-reference to `#skipping-ci-on-docs-only-commits`; #11 renamed that heading
to "Skipping CI on docs-only changes", because it is about pull requests as well
as commits now. Neither touched the other's lines, so git had nothing to flag.

markdownlint's MD051 does flag it. This repo runs no CI, so nothing did.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels
No items
No labels
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference
Grey.ooo/agent-standards!12
No description provided.