Skip to content

showcase-smoke.yml acquires pnpm via pnpm/action-setup@v6 — a third acquisition path that a corepack enable-keyed census cannot see #11765

Description

@os-steve

Filed unassigned by the dev seat working #11369. ⛔ Not touched there — #11369's population was defined by corepack enable, and this site does not contain that string.

The observation

#11369 adopted .github/actions/setup-pnpm at all 16 corepack enable sites, taking .github/workflows/ to 0 occurrences across 0 files. That count is true and still leaves one workflow downloading pnpm per job, because it acquires pnpm by a different mechanism:

# .github/workflows/showcase-smoke.yml
- uses: actions/checkout@v7
- uses: pnpm/action-setup@v6 # <- not Corepack, so invisible to the census
- uses: actions/setup-node@v7with:
node-version: '22'cache: pnpm

Measured on origin/main: pnpm/action-setup appears in exactly 1 workflow (showcase-smoke.yml), and it is the only workflow using it. Control, so the 1 is not an artefact: corepack enable across .github/workflows/ is 0 post-#11369, while uses: ./.github/actions/setup-pnpm is 23.

Why this is worth recording rather than just fixing

This is the same asymmetry the #11369 card itself named, one level up. That card observed that a signature keyed on the step name Verify pnpm version under-reported the sites, because the unpaired ones downloaded inside a differently-named step. The same thing is true of the census keyed on corepack enable: it is now a complete answer about Corepack and reads as a complete answer about pnpm acquisition, which it is not. Anyone who greps corepack enable in six months gets 0 and concludes the class is closed.

Stakes: low, and deliberately stated as such

showcase-smoke.yml is workflow_dispatch + nightly (0 7 * * *), explicitly NON-BLOCKING ("it never gates PRs" — its own header). So a flake here is a red nightly, not a queue ejection and not a failed release. This is an observation, not a defect worth pre-empting a queued card for.

Also note it is not a pure swap: this job relies on actions/setup-node's cache: pnpm, which requires pnpm to be on PATHbefore the setup-node step runs — the opposite of the ordering every setup-pnpm caller uses (setup-node first, then the composite). Whoever picks this up should treat it as an ordering question, not a find-and-replace.

Dedup

Searched open issues before filing (showcase-smoke, pnpm/action-setup, pnpm acquisition, corepack, composite action): nothing covers this. #11369 is scoped to the Corepack population by its own measurement and does not reach here.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions