docs: the Coolify deploy hook is LIVE — six docs still call it a placeholder #33

Merged

admin merged 2 commits from docs/coolify-deploy-hook-is-live-opus5 into main 2026-09-06 08:05:08 +00:00

Conversation 1 Commits 2 Files Changed 6

+39 -7

2 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Claude Opus 5	853f09320c	docs: probed 0pt.app — Vercel answers with HTTP 402 DEPLOYMENT_DISABLED ... The previous commit said "nobody has probed the running site". I then probed it, so the docs should not keep hedging. curl -sI https://0pt.app/ HTTP/2 402 server: Vercel x-vercel-error: DEPLOYMENT_DISABLED strict-transport-security: max-age=63072000 https://0pt.app/api/health -> HTTP 402, body "Payment required / DEPLOYMENT_DISABLED" Two facts hold simultaneously and the docs now state both: the Coolify deploy hook fires for real on every push to main, AND the public product domain is dark behind a disabled Vercel deployment with DNS never cut over. Neither cancels the other. Still not established, and still marked as such: whether the Coolify app builds and starts. A deploy endpoint returning 200 means the request was accepted, not that a container came up healthy. Side note worth recording for PR #19: the HSTS header on that 402 response is Vercel's platform default, which is exactly the disappearing-on-cutover risk next.config.mjs in PR #19 was written to remove. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-09-06 10:01:17 +02:00
Claude Opus 5	d7a1c4d5e1	docs: the Coolify deploy hook is LIVE — six docs still say it is a placeholder ... Six documents on main assert that no Coolify app has been provisioned for 0pt and that cd.yml's COOLIFY_APP_ID is a literal placeholder whose guard fails the job on purpose. That is no longer true, and the gap is not cosmetic: it means a merge to main silently ships to production while the repo's own docs promise it cannot. Measured, not assumed: * repo Actions secret COOLIFY_TOKEN exists, created 2026-08-31T11:34:34Z (GET /api/v1/repos/sax3l/0pt/actions/secrets) * repo Actions variable COOLIFY_APP_ID exists with a real 24-character value, not the "TODO-no-coolify-app-provisioned-yet" literal (GET /api/v1/repos/sax3l/0pt/actions/variables) * both guards in .gitea/workflows/cd.yml therefore pass; on the push to main at 1ff34410 (2026-09-06) the job "Deploy to Coolify / deploy" (run 11695, job 26295) finished SUCCESS with "coolify deploy HTTP 200" in its log Deliberately NOT claimed: that the Coolify app builds, starts or serves, or that 0pt.app DNS points at it rather than Vercel. Nobody probed the running site, and every corrected passage says so explicitly rather than replacing one unverified claim with another. Corrected: README.md "Deploy", docs/02-architecture.md hosting callout, docs/architecture/decisions/0001 (consequence annotated, decision untouched -- an ADR is a historical record), docs/runbook/incident.md (the symptom row is now inverted: the risk is an unintended deploy, not a red job), docs/compliance/GOLDEN-STANDARD-REPORT.md D4 (❌ -> ⚠️, not ✅, because "webhook accepted" is not "app serves"), docs/compliance/INVENTORY.md CI row. Falsifiable check over all six files (stale claim present without a correction marker = red): origin/main -> FAIL (12 findings) this branch -> PASS mutation: drop only the README bullet -> FAIL mutation: drop only the runbook correction -> FAIL The check initially passed vacuously on docs/02-architecture.md because PR #32 had already put the string "CORRECTED 2026-09-06" in that file for an unrelated reason; the marker was made specific so the check could actually fail there too. Docs only. No workflow files, no .gitignore, no source. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-09-06 09:56:53 +02:00