v1.0.0 beta.5

[leogdion]

No description provided.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Draft PR not reviewed

Draft PRs are not automatically reviewed by default.

• Trigger a manual review

To automatically review draft PRs, update your CodeRabbit configuration:

reviews:
  auto_review:
    drafts: true

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 86.40%. Comparing base (0375d09) to head (6a86bf1).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...hentication/AdaptiveTokenManager+Transitions.swift	80.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #459      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   81.74%   86.40%   +4.65%     
==========================================
  Files         196      198       +2     
  Lines        4755     4810      +55     
==========================================
+ Hits         3887     4156     +269     
+ Misses        868      654     -214     

Flag	Coverage Δ
mistdemo-spm-macos	11.16% <5.55%> (-0.07%)	⬇️
mistdemo-swift-6.2-jammy	?
mistdemo-swift-6.2-noble	?
mistdemo-swift-6.3-jammy	?
mistdemo-swift-6.3-noble	?
mistdemo-swift-6.4-jammy	11.16% <5.55%> (-0.07%)	⬇️
mistdemo-swift-6.4-noble	11.29% <5.55%> (+0.05%)	⬆️
spm	85.09% <95.83%> (+4.73%)	⬆️
swift-6.1-jammy	85.15% <95.83%> (+4.84%)	⬆️
swift-6.1-noble	84.96% <95.83%> (+4.44%)	⬆️
swift-6.2-jammy	85.11% <95.83%> (+4.48%)	⬆️
swift-6.2-noble	84.98% <95.83%> (+4.54%)	⬆️
swift-6.3-jammy	84.96% <95.83%> (+4.42%)	⬆️
swift-6.3-noble	84.86% <95.83%> (+4.46%)	⬆️
swift-6.4-jammy	85.15% <95.83%> (+4.71%)	⬆️
swift-6.4-noble	85.06% <95.83%> (+4.52%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[claude]

Review: v1.0.0 beta.5 release PR

This is a large aggregate PR (236 files, +8691/-2546), but the actual Sources/MistKit/Sources/MistKitOpenAPI surface touched is small (zone wire-key rename, new ZoneType, a deleted tombstone flag, and zoneID: threading into asset/write ops). The bulk of the diff is a new shared Packages/MistKitConfiguration subrepo consolidating config/validation code out of the three Examples, plus docs/CI/tooling. Reviewed with three focused passes (core library, Examples+CI, new config package). Summary below, most important first.

🔴 Release-process: ReleaseNotes.md has no ## 1.0.0-beta.5 section

ReleaseNotes.md at the tip of this branch still tops out at ## 1.0.0-beta.4 — this PR adds no beta.5 entry. Per this repo's own CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md Release Process guardrail #1: "Never tag without notes... Both 1.0.0-beta.3 and 1.0.0-beta.4 were tagged with no ReleaseNotes.md section of their own." Shipping a third release without notes repeats the exact mistake that guardrail was written to prevent. Worth running ./Scripts/release.sh verify-tag <tag> --at HEAD before tagging.

🔴 Regression: CelestraCloud.yml MISTKIT_BRANCH pin flipped to tag form pre-merge

Examples/CelestraCloud/.github/workflows/CelestraCloud.yml:24 changes:

-  MISTKIT_BRANCH: v1.0.0-beta.4
+  MISTKIT_BRANCH: 1.0.0-beta.4

This is backwards per this PR's own new documentation (AGENTS.md's Release Process section, mirroring CLAUDE.md): "before the merge the pin must be the branch, after publishing it must be the tag." setup-mistkit resolves MISTKIT_BRANCH via git ls-remote, which matches tags too — since 1.0.0-beta.4 is already a published tag, CelestraCloud's CI will now silently build against the old, already-released beta.4 code instead of testing this release branch at all. This is the precise failure mode the doc warns about. Recommend reverting to v1.0.0-beta.4 (or bumping to v1.0.0-beta.5) — BushelCloud's equivalent pins (bushel-cloud-build.yml, cloudkit-sync/action.yml) correctly kept the v-prefixed branch form, so CelestraCloud.yml is now the outlier, not the other way around.

🟡 CI failure: "Build static mistdemo"

Root cause: this PR adds .package(path: "../../Packages/MistKitConfiguration") to Examples/MistDemo/Package.swift, and MistKitConfiguration declares swift-tools-version: 6.4. MistDemo.yml/examples.yml were correctly bumped to a 6.4 nightly toolchain, but .github/workflows/MistDemo-Integration.yml (container swift:6.3.2-noble, line ~51/64) was missed — Swift 6.3.2 can't parse a 6.4 manifest, so the static-Linux build job fails immediately. Needs the same toolchain bump as the other two workflows.

🟢 Core library changes — no blocking issues

• ZoneID gains zoneType: ZoneType? in a synthesized Equatable/Hashable struct — a response-decoded ZoneID will no longer == a hand-constructed one for the same zone. Internal code doesn't rely on ZoneID equality (keys off zoneName strings), but any external consumer diffing ZoneID values across request/response boundaries would be affected. Might be worth a release-notes callout.
• ZoneInfo.deleted defaults absent→false, which is a different absent-vs-explicit-false philosophy than the neighboring atomic: Bool? (deliberately left un-defaulted per CLAUDE.md). Probably fine (Apple likely never sends deleted: false), but undocumented as a deliberate choice the way atomic is.
• Minor test gap: the new request-side zoneType serialization has no wire-format pin test (response-side decode is tested), unlike the thorough dedicated tests for the ownerName→ownerRecordName rename.
• Sources/MistKitOpenAPI/Types.swift changes match openapi.yaml 1:1 with no evidence of manual hand-editing. Import ACLs and Sendable compliance look correct throughout.

🟢 New Packages/MistKitConfiguration — solid consolidation

• No raw secret material ever appears in an error type (PEMValidationFailure/KeyIDValidationFailure are structural enums, no string payloads).
• secretCommandLineFlags is now derived from each key's isSecret flag rather than a hand-maintained list — closes a real prior redaction-drift risk.
• Duplicate PEMValidator/KeyIDValidator/CloudKitConfigurationError code fully removed from Examples/** (verified no leftovers); old per-example tests replaced by a single shared suite (603 lines across 7 files) — good coverage for a new package.
• Wiring is clean: each example depends via .package(path: "../../Packages/MistKitConfiguration") with the documented never-merged-overlay discipline already used for the MistKit line; root Package.swift correctly has no reference (Examples-only tooling).
• Pre-existing, not-introduced-by-this-PR weakness worth a follow-up issue: PEMValidator matches -----BEGIN... and ...PRIVATE KEY----- as two independent substring checks, so a block like BEGIN CERTIFICATE ... END PRIVATE KEY would incorrectly validate.

Nits

• New .github/workflows/release.yml has no explicit permissions: block (defaults to repo setting) — cheap least-privilege win since it only needs to read the tag.

Nothing here looks blocking on the library-correctness side, but the ReleaseNotes.md gap and the CelestraCloud.yml pin regression should be fixed before merge/tag — the latter means CelestraCloud's CI currently isn't validating this release at all.