daniel/gitdan's ci-cache-reclaim.sh hard-codes four dot-prefixed names it
reads to make correctness decisions but never reclaims as leftovers —
.ci-lock-*, .cache-last-used, .gitea-last-used, .ci-keep — none of which
carried a matching note here (gitdan#32, the follow-up shape to #28/#30
that #7/PR #8 covered for the leftover names specifically).
Of the four, this repo actually produces two:
- .ci-lock-<id>, written by scripts/cache-lock.sh (acquire/release) and
cache-lib.sh's write_cache_lock(). Documents the contract at
cache-lock.sh's header, the site someone renaming the marker would
most likely be editing.
- .cache-last-used, stamped every run by cargo-cache/action.yml. Documents
the contract at the exact line that writes it.
The other two are read by gitdan's script but produced by nothing in this
repo: .gitea-last-used is a legacy naming convention individual repos
used before adopting the shared cargo-cache action (nothing here writes
it today), and .ci-keep is a per-repo, hand-placed opt-out any consuming
repo's own workflow may drop directly into a cache directory, with no
single owner. Both get a paragraph in README.md's new subsection
explaining why no producer-side counterpart exists for them, rather than
inventing an owner this repo doesn't have.
README.md's "Scratch names in a cache root are a cross-repo contract"
section gains a new subsection, "Names this repo doesn't reclaim, but
the arbiter depends on", covering all four and pointing at gitdan's
DEPENDED-UPON NAMES CONTRACT block as the canonical description.
No behaviour change: comments and docs only.
Ref: gitdan#32. Consumer-side counterpart: daniel/gitdan (this branch's
sibling PR).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MJHKJFJVUjnvVsemVBnvrd
claudeandClaude Opus 5
4da6e8d30f
