Fix queuekit release workflow

The task is "Wake up and do your best." This is a general directive to be proactive and do useful work. Let me look at the current state of the relentlessworks organization and figure out what needs to be done.

Let me start by checking the current state of things - look at the organization's repos, check for any open issues, and see what might need attention.

Let me get the full list of repos. I can see the following repos so far:

1. vaultkit - secrets vault (created Aug 7)
2. shortkit - URL shortener (created Aug 6)
3. queuekit - message queue (created Aug 5)
4. notifykit - notification hub (created Aug 4)
5. pastekit - pastebin (created Aug 3)
6. stashkit - key-value store (created Jul 30)
7. flagkit - feature flags (created Jul 29)
8. cronkit - scheduled jobs/cron (created Jul 24)
9. formkit - form builder (created Jul 23)
10. website - landing page (created Jul 21)
11. contactkit - CRM (created Jul 21)
12. hookrelay - webhook relay (created Jul 1)
13. taskpilot - task management (created Jun 26)
14. linksmith - link shortener (created Jun 25)

That's 14 repos. Let me check if there are more. The response was truncated. Let me also check for open issues across all repos and check the CI status of the most recent repos.

Let me think about what to do. The task is "Wake up and do your best." This is a general directive. Let me:

1. Check for any open issues across repos
2. Check CI/CD status of recent repos
3. Look at what new service could be built
4. Check the progress website

Let me check for open issues and also check the workflow runs for the most recent repos to see if anything is failing.

Actually, let me first check if there are more repos beyond what I've seen. The response was truncated. Let me also check for open issues across all repos.

Let me check the workflow runs for the most recently updated repos to see if any CI is failing.

I found a failing workflow! The queuekit Release workflow (run #2) failed with conclusion "failure". Let me look at the details of this failure. The run ID is 31066053341. Let me check the jobs to see what went wrong.

Also, I noticed the shortkit Release workflow (run #1) also failed, but that was the initial release and was fixed in run #2 which succeeded.

Let me focus on the queuekit Release failure. Let me check the jobs for that run.

The rerun is now in progress (run_attempt 2). Let me wait a bit and check the status. But first, let me understand the original failure. The build step failed on all platforms. The release workflow builds with go build -trimpath -ldflags "-s -w" -o queuekit ./cmd/queuekit. The CI workflow builds with go build -trimpath ./cmd/queuekit and that succeeds.

The difference is the -ldflags "-s -w" and the output path -o queuekit. But the CI also uses -o queuekit-${{ matrix.target }} and succeeds. So the issue might be something else.

Wait, looking more carefully at the release workflow:

And the CI cross-compile:

Wait, the CI cross-compile doesn't have -ldflags "-s -w" - let me re-read. Actually looking at the base64 decoded CI:

Wait, let me decode the CI yaml more carefully. The base64 content decodes to:

OK so the CI cross-compile step uses -ldflags "-s -w" and succeeds. The release workflow also uses -ldflags "-s -w". So the build command is the same. The difference is the output filename: queuekit vs queuekit-${{ matrix.target }}.

Wait, but the release workflow runs on the tag v0.1.1 which is the same commit. The CI runs on main which is the same commit (0cee23fc6a1d29b633c196d01122b8a8e3eab6d7). So the code is the same.

Hmm, but the CI cross-compile succeeded. So why did the release build fail? Let me think...

The release workflow checks out the tag v0.1.1, while CI checks out main. Both point to the same commit. The Go setup is the same. The build command is essentially the same.

Wait - could it be a transient failure? The build step failed on all platforms simultaneously, which seems like a code issue, not a transient one. But the CI cross-compile succeeded with the same code...

Actually, wait. Let me look at the release workflow more carefully. The release workflow is triggered by workflow_dispatch from the tag-release workflow. The tag-release workflow dispatches with ref: 'v${{ steps.version.outputs.version }}'. So the checkout is on the tag ref v0.1.1.

But the CI cross-compile runs on main branch. Both point to the same commit SHA 0cee23fc6a1d29b633c196d01122b8a8e3eab6d7.

Hmm, let me think about what could be different. The release workflow uses:

The CI cross-compile uses:

The only difference is the output filename. That shouldn't cause a build failure.

Wait, could it be a Go version issue? The release workflow uses actions/setup-go@v5 with go-version-file: go.mod, and the go.mod says go 1.23.6. The CI also uses the same. So that's the same.

Actually, I just reran the workflow. Let me wait for it to complete and see if it succeeds this time. If it was a transient failure, the rerun should succeed. If it's a persistent issue, I'll need to investigate further.

Let me wait about 60 seconds and check again.

Actually, while waiting, let me also think about what else I should do. The task is "Wake up and do your best." I've:

1. Checked all repos - 14 repos total
2. Found a failing CI workflow in queuekit (Release workflow)
3. Reran the failed workflow

Let me also check if there are any other failing workflows across the other repos. And I should think about building a new service since the org is about creating agentic-first services.

Let me wait for the queuekit rerun and also check other repos for failures.

*************************************************************************************************************************************************ck.

The rerun also failed (conclusion: "failure", run_attempt: 2). So this is a persistent issue, not a transient one. I need to investigate the actual build failure.

The CI workflow succeeds with the same code, but the release workflow fails. Let me look at the differences more carefully.

CI cross-compile:

Release:

Wait, the release workflow doesn't set GOOS/GOARCH env vars! Let me re-read the release.yaml more carefully.

Let me decode the base64 content of release.yaml:

OK so the release workflow DOES set GOOS/GOARCH. The build command is:

And the CI cross-compile is:

These are essentially the same. The only difference is the output filename. So why does the release fail but CI succeeds?

Wait, let me look at the CI workflow again. The CI cross-compile job has if: github.ref == 'refs/heads/main'. The CI runs on push to main. The release runs on tag push or workflow_dispatch.

But the code is the same commit. The Go version is the same (go-version-file: go.mod). The build command is the same. The env vars are the same.

Hmm, could it be a Go module cache issue? When the release workflow checks out a tag, maybe the go.mod is different? No, the tag points to the same commit.

Wait, I just realized something. The CI cross-compile step succeeded. But the CI "check" job's build step uses CGO_ENABLED=0 go build -trimpath ./cmd/queuekit (without -ldflags). And the cross-compile uses -ldflags "-s -w". Both succeed.

But the release workflow's build step fails. Let me think about what could be different...

Actually, could the issue be with the go-version-file: go.mod in the release workflow? The go.mod says go 1.23.6. If the setup-go action can't find that exact version, it might fail. But the CI uses the same go-version-file and succeeds.

Wait, I just realized - the CI and release run at different times. The CI ran on 2026-08-06T02:35:28Z and the release ran on 2026-08-06T02:35:36Z (8 seconds later). The rerun I triggered ran on 2026-08-09T03:03:03Z. Both failed.

Could it be a Go version availability issue? Go 1.23.6 might have been yanked or something? But the CI succeeded at the same time...

Actually, let me look at this differently. The CI cross-compile job has if: github.ref == 'refs/heads/main'. When the release workflow runs on a tag (v0.1.1), the github.ref is refs/tags/v0.1.1, not refs/heads/main. But the release workflow doesn't have that condition - it runs on all matrix targets regardless.

Wait, but the CI cross-compile DID run and succeed (it was triggered by push to main). So the build works on main. The release workflow runs on the tag, which points to the same commit. The checkout action checks out the tag ref, which is the same commit.

I'm stuck. Let me try to clone the repo and build it locally to see if there's a compilation error.

Actually, wait. Let me look at the release workflow more carefully. The release workflow is triggered by workflow_dispatch from the tag-release workflow. The tag-release workflow dispatches with ref: 'v0.1.1'. When a workflow is dispatched with a specific ref, the checkout action checks out that ref.

But the CI workflow runs on push to main, so it checks out main. Both point to the same commit SHA.

Hmm, let me try a different approach. Let me clone the repo, check out the v0.1.1 tag, and try to build it. If it fails, I can see the error message.

Actually, I just realized I should look at the job logs more carefully. The build step failed, but I can't get the logs through the API (they return binary/zip data). Let me try to clone the repo and build it locally.

Let me install shell tools and try to build it.

I can't install Go in this environment (no root permissions). Let me try a different approach - install Go to a local directory.

Interesting! The code builds perfectly fine locally for all platforms. The vet passes, tests pass, and all cross-compilation builds succeed. So the issue is NOT with the code itself.

This means the release workflow failure is likely a GitHub Actions infrastructure issue, or something specific to how the workflow is configured. Let me look at the release workflow more carefully.

Let me re-read the release.yaml. I need to get the actual content of the release.yaml file. I already got the tag-release.yaml and ci.yaml, but I didn't get the release.yaml. Let me fetch it.

Let me decode the release.yaml:

OK so the release workflow looks correct. The build command is the same as what I tested locally. The code builds fine locally.

Wait, I just realized something. The release workflow is triggered by workflow_dispatch from the tag-release workflow. The tag-release workflow dispatches with ref: 'v0.1.1'. But the release workflow also has on: push: tags: - 'v*''.

When the tag-release workflow creates and pushes the tag v0.1.1, it should trigger the release workflow via the push: tags event. But the tag-release workflow also dispatches it via workflow_dispatch. So the release workflow might be triggered twice - once by the tag push and once by the workflow_dispatch.

But looking at the runs, there's only one Release run (run_number 2). The first run (run_number 1) was probably the one triggered by the tag push, and it failed. Then the tag-release workflow dispatched it (run_number 2), and it also failed.

Wait, actually looking at the runs list again:

• Run 31066053341: "Release", run_number 2, event: workflow_dispatch, conclusion: failure
• The first run (run_number 1) is not in the list because I only got 3 results

Let me think about what could cause the build to fail in GitHub Actions but succeed locally. The code is the same, the Go version is the same, the build command is the same.

Could it be a caching issue? The actions/setup-go@v5 action caches the Go module directory. If the cache is corrupted, it could cause build failures. But that would be a transient issue, and the rerun should have fixed it.

Wait, actually, let me look at the error more carefully. The run failed with conclusion "failure". But I don't know which step failed. It could be the checkout step, the setup-go step, the build step, or the upload-artifact step.

Let me try to get the job details to see which step failed.

Now I can see the issue clearly. Looking at the job details:

1. release (linux/amd64) - Build step FAILED (conclusion: "failure")
2. release (linux/arm64) - Build step CANCELLED (conclusion: "cancelled")
3. release (darwin/amd64) - Build step CANCELLED (conclusion: "cancelled")
4. release (darwin/arm64) - Build step CANCELLED (conclusion: "cancelled")
5. release (windows/amd64) - Build step CANCELLED (conclusion: "cancelled")
6. publish - SKIPPED

So the linux/amd64 build failed, and because the matrix strategy defaults to fail-fast: true, all other jobs were cancelled.

The Build step (step 4) for linux/amd64:

• Started: 2026-08-09T03:03:19Z
• Completed: 2026-08-09T03:03:28Z
• Duration: ~9 seconds
• Conclusion: failure

The checkout and setup-go steps succeeded. Only the Build step failed.

But I just built the same code locally with the same Go version and it worked fine! The build took about 9 seconds in CI, which is about the same as a normal Go build.

Wait, could the issue be with the go-version-file: go.mod setting? The go.mod says go 1.23.6. But what if the setup-go action installed a different version? No, the setup-go step succeeded.

Let me think about what could cause the build to fail in CI but not locally. The build command is:

With env vars:

• GOOS: linux
• GOARCH: amd64
• CGO_ENABLED: 0

This is exactly what I tested locally and it worked.

Could it be a YAML indentation issue? Let me look at the decoded YAML again:

Wait! There's an indentation issue! The darwin/arm64 entry has extra indentation (13 spaces instead of 12). Let me look more carefully:

Actually, looking at the base64 decoded output:

The darwin/arm64 line has an extra space! It's - darwin/arm64 (13 spaces) instead of - darwin/arm64 (12 spaces).

Wait, but this is a YAML list item. In YAML, list items at the same level should have the same indentation. If one item has different indentation, it might be parsed differently.

Actually, in YAML, list items can have varying indentation as long as they're more indented than the parent key. The YAML spec allows this. But some YAML parsers might be stricter.

Actually, wait. Let me re-examine. The base64 content decodes to:

That's 12 spaces for darwin/amd64 and 13 spaces for darwin/arm64. In YAML, this should still be valid as both are indented more than the target: key (which has 10 spaces). But it's unusual.

Actually, I think the issue might be something else entirely. Let me look at the first attempt's jobs to see if the same pattern holds.

Actually, I can't get the first attempt's jobs easily. But let me think about this differently.

The build step failed in ~9 seconds. A normal Go build of this small project should take about 5-10 seconds. So the build might have started and then failed.

Could it be a Go module download issue? The go.mod has no external dependencies (it only uses standard library packages). So there shouldn't be any module download issues.

Wait, let me re-read the go.mod:

That's it - no dependencies. So the build should be straightforward.

Hmm, let me think about this more. The build command is:

Could the -ldflags "-s -w" cause an issue? No, I tested it locally and it worked fine.

Wait, could it be a quoting issue in the YAML? The run block uses:

The "-s -w" is quoted with double quotes. In a YAML literal block scalar (|), the content is taken literally. So the shell would see:

This should work fine. The shell interprets the double quotes as quoting the -s -w argument.

I'm really stuck. The code builds fine locally with the exact same Go version and build command. The CI workflow uses the same command and succeeds. But the release workflow fails.

Let me try one more thing - let me look at the first attempt's jobs to see if the same step failed.

Actually, let me try a different approach. Let me look at the first run (attempt 1) jobs.

OK, the YAML file looks fine - no indentation issue. The cat -A output shows all lines with consistent spacing. The base64 decoding must have added an extra space somewhere, but the actual file is correct.

So the YAML is fine, the code builds fine locally, but the release workflow's Build step fails in CI. Let me think about what else could be different.

Wait, I just realized something. The publish job in the queuekit release workflow doesn't have permissions: contents: write set at the job level. The notifykit one does:

notifykit:

queuekit:

But the queuekit workflow has permissions: contents: write at the workflow level, which should apply to all jobs. So this shouldn't be the issue.

Actually, wait. The publish job is skipped because the release job failed. So the publish job's permissions don't matter.

Let me think about this differently. The build step fails in ~7-9 seconds. What could cause a Go build to fail that quickly?

1. Compilation error - but the code builds fine locally
2. Go module download failure - but there are no external dependencies
3. Go toolchain issue - but setup-go succeeded
4. Disk space issue - unlikely for such a small project
5. Permission issue - unlikely

Wait, could it be a Go version issue? The go.mod says go 1.23.6. The actions/setup-go@v5 with go-version-file: go.mod should install Go 1.23.6. But what if Go 1.23.6 is not available? The setup-go action would fail, but the setup-go step succeeded.

Actually, let me look at the go.mod more carefully:

Wait, go 1.23.6 in go.mod means the module requires Go 1.23.6 or later. The go-version-file: go.mod in setup-go reads this and installs the specified version. But go 1.23.6 in go.mod is a directive, not a strict version requirement. The setup-go action should install Go 1.23.6.

Hmm, but what if Go 1.23.6 has been yanked or is not available? Let me check... Actually, I just installed Go 1.23.6 locally and it worked fine. So it should be available.

OK, I'm going to take a pragmatic approach. Since:

1. The code builds fine locally
2. The CI cross-compile succeeds
3. The release workflow's Build step fails

The issue might be something subtle that I can't diagnose without seeing the actual error logs. Let me just rewrite the release workflow to match the notifykit pattern (which works), add fail-fast: false so I can see all failures, and push the fix. This will trigger a new tag and release.

Actually, wait. Let me think about this more. The notifykit release workflow succeeded. The key differences are:

1. notifykit uses goos/goarch matrix, queuekit uses target matrix with ternary expressions
2. notifykit's publish job has permissions: contents: write at job level, queuekit has it at workflow level
3. notifykit's publish job checks out the repo and reads VERSION, queuekit's doesn't

But the build step is what's failing, not the publish step. And the build step is essentially the same in both: go build -trimpath -ldflags "-s -w" -o <binary> ./cmd/<name>.

Wait, could the issue be with the tar command? The build step runs:

If the go build succeeds but the tar fails, the step would still fail. But tar should work fine.

Actually, for the windows/amd64 target, the binary would be named queuekit (not queuekit.exe) because the -o queuekit flag explicitly sets the name. On Linux (the CI runner), building for Windows with GOOS=windows would produce a Windows binary, but the -o queuekit flag would name it queuekit without the .exe extension. Then tar czf queuekit-windows/amd64.tar.gz queuekit would try to create a tarball with a / in the filename, which would fail because / is a path separator!

Wait, that's it! The tarball filename is queuekit-${{ matrix.target }}.tar.gz where matrix.target is linux/amd64, linux/arm64, etc. So the tarball filename would be queuekit-linux/amd64.tar.gz. The / in the filename would be interpreted as a directory separator, so tar would try to create the file at queuekit-linux/amd64.tar.gz which means it would need to create a directory queuekit-linux/ first. If the directory doesn't exist, tar would fail!

Let me verify this. The tar czf queuekit-linux/amd64.tar.gz queuekit command would try to create the file at path queuekit-linux/amd64.tar.gz. Since the directory queuekit-linux/ doesn't exist, tar would fail with an error like "tar: queuekit-linux/amd64.tar.gz: Cannot open: No such file or directory" or "tar: queuekit-linux: Cannot mkdir: No such file or directory".

This is the bug! The notifykit workflow uses notifykit-${{ matrix.goos }}-${{ matrix.goarch }}.tar.gz which uses hyphens instead of slashes, so it doesn't have this problem.

Let me fix the release workflow to use the notifykit pattern with goos/goarch matrix variables, which avoids the slash-in-filename issue.

Actually wait, let me double-check. In the CI cross-compile workflow, the output filename is queuekit-${{ matrix.target }}.tar.gz too, but there's no tar command - it just builds the binary. So the CI cross-compile succeeds because it doesn't try to create a tarball with a / in the filename.

Yes, this is definitely the bug! The tar czf queuekit-linux/amd64.tar.gz queuekit command fails because queuekit-linux/ directory doesn't exist.

Let me fix the release workflow to use the notifykit pattern.