Repository navigation
Restore cached responses for duplicate publish requests - #797
Open
thomashoneyman wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
thomashoneyman wants to merge 1 commit into
thomashoneyman wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
thomashoneyman
force-pushed
the
restore-publish-job-cache
branch
from
October 10, 2026 12:01
5a5400b to
73408cd
Compare
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This restores caching for failed publish jobs following @f-f’s review of #794. Once we have a publish job for a package name and version, another submission returns an existing job ID instead of starting more work.
That restores the protection against repeated (automated) publishing and stops resubmission from being a way to change a tag and try again. It also means a failed publish stays blocked for now. We can discuss a controlled way to retry in #793 rather than introducing one here.