build: run the docgen command with make tag release

[zimeg]

Summary

This PR follows up on #228 and adds the docgen command to the "make tag" release script. Might substitute #197?

Preview

tag.mov

Reviewers

Please feel free to comment out the "diff" and "commit" and "tag" steps for fast testing:

diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index e6d9c24..dca25b0 100644
--- a/Makefile+++ b/Makefile@@ -77,8 +77,8 @@ build-snapshot: clean
# Usage: `make tag RELEASE_VERSION=3.7.0-example`
.PHONY: tag
tag:
-	git diff --quiet --cached-	git diff --quiet+	# git diff --quiet --cached+	# git diff --quiet
@if echo "$(RELEASE_VERSION)" | grep -q '^v'; then \
echo "Error: Release version should not begin with a version prefix."; \
exit 1; \
@@ -99,6 +99,6 @@ tag:
git add docs/guides/installing-the-slack-cli-for-mac-and-linux.md
git add docs/guides/installing-the-slack-cli-for-windows.md
@printf "$(FONT_BOLD)Git Commit$(FONT_RESET)\n"
-	git commit -m "chore: release slack-cli v$(RELEASE_VERSION)"+	# git commit -m "chore: release slack-cli v$(RELEASE_VERSION)"
@printf "$(FONT_BOLD)Git Tag$(FONT_RESET)\n"
-	git tag v$(RELEASE_VERSION)+	# git tag v$(RELEASE_VERSION)

Then confirm reference is regenerated and versions are updated as expected!

$ rm docs/reference/errors.md
$ rm docs/reference/commands/slack_app_list.md
$ git status
...
modified: Makefile
deleted: docs/reference/commands/slack_app_list.md
deleted: docs/reference/errors.md
... $ make tag RELEASE_VERSION=3.7.1
...
git tag v3.7.1
$ git status
On branch zimeg-build-release-docgen
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/zimeg-build-release-docgen'.
Changes to be committed:
(use "git restore --staged <file>..." to unstage)
modified: docs/guides/installing-the-slack-cli-for-mac-and-linux.md
modified: docs/guides/installing-the-slack-cli-for-windows.md
Changes not staged for commit:
(use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed)
(use "git restore <file>..." to discard changes in working directory)
modified: Makefile

Notes

I'm still interested in the PR approach @lukegalbraithrussell shares in #197 in quest to automate more releases, but for now I think this'll match our current processes 👾

Requirements

• I've read and understood the Contributing Guidelines and have done my best effort to follow them.
• I've read and agree to the Code of Conduct.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.95%. Comparing base (ba5cb15) to head (c4d569f).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #229 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 62.96% 62.95% -0.02% 
==========================================
Files 212 212 Lines 21782 21782 ==========================================
- Hits 13715 13712 -3 
Misses 7005 7005 - Partials 1062 1065 +3 

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 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.

[mwbrooks]

✅ Love this iteration and honestly it feel safer than having a workflow that will make a commit.

📝 I left a minor suggestion to skip the upgrade prompt, which I came across while testing.

[mwbrooks]

Very nice! 🚀 time!

[zimeg]

@mwbrooks Thanks tons! Tests are passing now so we can merge this in hopes for a good release process next! 🚀

[zimeg]

@mwbrooks 🗣️ ramble: Oops I hit send so soon - meant to agree that a commit on machine can be faster in current setups!