Skip to content

Point the bundle-release workflow at the diplicity-react service - #1316

Open
johnpooch wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/capacitor-ota-updates-qvj57l
Open

Point the bundle-release workflow at the diplicity-react service#1316
johnpooch wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/capacitor-ota-updates-qvj57l

Conversation

@johnpooch

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

What this PR does

bundle-release.yml passed --service=diplicity-react-production to railway run. That is the deploy domain prefix (diplicity-react-production.up.railway.app), not a service name, so the publish step cannot resolve it. Points it at diplicity-react instead.

Verified against the live project with a project-scoped token:

railway run --service= result
diplicity-react-production Service not found
diplicity-react resolves, reports environment production
(omitted) Multiple services found

The name was carried over from build-and-deploy-service.yml:19, which passes the same string to railway up and deploys main without complaint. railway up is more forgiving about the service name than railway run is, so that workflow succeeding is not evidence the name is correct — which is how this got through review on #1304.

Recorded in .claude/rules/backend/ota-releases.md so the next workflow doesn't copy the name from a deploy workflow and assume it's right.

Not fixed here

The first dispatch of this workflow (run 34062490563) failed earlier than this, on authentication:

Invalid RAILWAY_TOKEN. Please check that it is valid and has access to the resource you're trying to use.

That is upstream of the service lookup and is a secret-configuration problem, not a code one — railway run needs a project-scoped token in RAILWAY_TOKEN, while an account token belongs in RAILWAY_API_TOKEN (the split is documented in .claude/skills/production/SKILL.md). This PR does not address it; the token has to be right before the corrected service name gets exercised.

build-and-deploy-service.yml still passes the same non-existent service name to railway up. Its post-deploy version check passes, so deploys are landing somewhere real and nothing is visibly broken — left alone deliberately rather than changed on a hunch.

Checklist

  • This PR does one thing — no unrelated fixes, refactors, or drive-by cleanups bundled in
  • For PRs of any significant complexity: I ran /review-pr against this PR in Claude Code and addressed (or responded to) its findings — not applicable; this is a one-token change to a workflow, verified directly against the Railway CLI rather than by review
  • Tests cover the change — none possible; CI cannot exercise a workflow_dispatch job guarded on main. Verified by running railway run --service against the live project, as tabulated above. YAML re-parsed after the edit.
  • Screenshots embedded in the PR description for any visual changes — none; nothing in the web app changes

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01CMxVHZUhpRht949vkWiDD3


Generated by Claude Code

railway run --service took diplicity-react-production, which is the deploy
domain prefix rather than a service name, so the publish step fails with
"Service not found" once it gets past authentication. Verified against the
live project: --service=diplicity-react resolves and reports environment
production, --service=diplicity-react-production does not resolve, and
omitting the flag reports multiple services.

The name was carried over from build-and-deploy-service.yml, which passes
the same string to railway up without complaint. railway up is more
forgiving about the service name than railway run, so that workflow working
is not evidence the name is right. Recorded in the ota-releases rule so the
next workflow does not copy it again.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01CMxVHZUhpRht949vkWiDD3
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Warning

WIP limit exceeded. There are now 9 open pull requests — the project target is 5 or fewer.

Please close or merge an existing PR before continuing with this one.

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.

2 participants