Merge pull request 'fix(ci): the settings token could never have been stored' (#15) from fix/secret-name-and-require-gitea-settings into main

Reviewed-on: #15
Reviewed-by: Keith Jackson <[email protected]>

.gitea/workflows/gate.yml

@@ -110,9 +110,27 @@ jobs:
       # UNVERIFIED and NAMED in the PASS headline, never faked green. GATE_STRICT_SKIPS + the
       # tolerated exit 3 are explained in the file header; the tolerance covers exactly one
       # thing, the unverifiable spec repo, and nothing else can produce a 3 here.
+      # GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN feeds ci/gitea-settings.sh, the only check that can see Gitea's
+      # OWN database (branch protection + runner registration) — the blind spot that let `main`
+      # sit unprotected with zero runners for a month while this repo recorded both as working.
+      # Referenced BY NAME only; create it with infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh.
+      #
+      # WIDENED TOLERANCE, DECLARED: `|| [ "$?" -eq 3 ]` used to cover exactly one skip
+      # (spec-immutability). It now also covers gitea-settings skipping when that secret is
+      # absent. That is a deliberate, temporary weakening: making an unwired credential BLOCK
+      # every PR is the lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps walking into. Once the secret
+      # exists and the stage has been SEEN green, set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true below and the
+      # tolerance narrows back to spec-immutability alone.
       - name: Merge gate — ci/gate.sh (what `make -C ci gate` runs)
         env:
           GATE_STRICT_SKIPS: "true"
+          SETTINGS_API_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.SETTINGS_API_TOKEN }}
+          # ENABLED 2026-09-29. A skip of gitea-settings now BLOCKS instead of degrading to
+          # UNDETERMINED. Safe because THIS PR's own CI run is the proof: if the stage were
+          # skipping, this line turns that into a failure and the PR goes red instead of
+          # merging. Green here means the token resolved and the live Gitea matched the
+          # declaration in infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json.
+          REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS: "true"
         run: ./ci/gate.sh || [ "$?" -eq 3 ]
 
       # NOTE: no actions/upload-artifact step. Gitea Actions rejects upload-artifact@v4

DECISIONS-LOG.md

@@ -4924,3 +4924,43 @@ being unable to recur.
 4. `required_approvals: 1` means a PR you open as `jakman85` needs `gitea-admin` to approve.
    If that friction bites, either open agent work as `gitea-admin` and review as `jakman85`, or
    drop back to relying on the status check alone.
+
+## 2026-09-29 (later still) — the enforcement we "turned on" was overridable by the account that merges
+
+`enable_status_check: true` and `required_approvals: 1` were set earlier today and recorded as
+done. **They did not bite.** `block_admin_merge_override` was `false`, and Gitea lets repository
+admins override merge requirements without it. `jakman85` holds `owner`, so both requirements
+were bypassable by exactly the account that performs every merge.
+
+**The evidence was already on the record and nobody read it:** PRs #5, #6, #7, #8 and #9 all
+merged while `required_approvals: 1` was in force, with **zero approvals recorded on any of
+them**. A one-line check (`/pulls/{n}/reviews`) would have shown it at any point.
+
+Two process failures, both mine, both the same shape as the original defect:
+
+1. **I verified with the wrong view.** `/branches/main` reports `protected`,
+   `enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` but NOT `block_admin_merge_override`. It
+   showed everything green while the rule was overridable. The authoritative object is
+   `/branch_protections/main` — read it and enumerate its keys.
+2. **I probed for a field name I assumed existed.** This Gitea (1.24.3) has no
+   `apply_to_admins`. Asking `jq` for it returns `null`, which reads exactly like "set to
+   false" but means "key absent" — so a PATCH that silently did nothing looked like a real
+   before/after. **`jq` returning null is not a value; it may be an absence.** Enumerate with
+   `to_entries`.
+
+Now `block_admin_merge_override: true`, applied and read back. `infra/gitea/require-gate.sh`
+sets it, and `infra/gitea/block-admin-override.sh` fixes it in isolation.
+
+**This is still only a setting.** It is proven when a green PR is REFUSED a merge until
+approved — and that has not been observed yet. This PR is the test: if it merges without an
+approval, the fix did not work and the finding stands.
+
+### The governance question this exposes
+
+There are two accounts: `jakman85` (owner, the human) and `gitea-admin` (the agent). With
+approvals now genuinely required, an agent-authored PR is approved by the human — which is the
+intent. But a PR authored by `jakman85` needs `gitea-admin` to approve it, i.e. the automation
+account rubber-stamping the human. That is ceremony, not review. Options: keep it and accept
+the ceremony; drop `required_approvals` to 0 and rely on the status check, which is the gate
+that actually verifies something; or add a second human account. **This is a decision for the
+operator, not a default to be chosen silently.**

ci/Makefile

@@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ render-golden: ## render==golden: canonical render reproduces committed apps/ (n
 l1: ## L1 rendering checks (no cluster; live now)
 	@"$(CI_DIR)l1.sh"
 
+gitea-settings: ## Gitea branch protection + runners match infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json (SKIPS w/o GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN)
+	@./gitea-settings.sh
+
 conformance: ## L2/L3 in-cluster Chainsaw Job (SKIPS w/o CLUSTER_AVAILABLE=true)
 	@"$(CI_DIR)conformance.sh"
 

ci/gate.sh

@@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ run_stage lint          "${CI_DIR}/lint.sh"
 run_stage l0            "${CI_DIR}/l0.sh"
 run_stage render-golden "${CI_DIR}/render-golden.sh"
 run_stage l1            "${CI_DIR}/l1.sh"
+run_stage gitea-settings "${CI_DIR}/gitea-settings.sh"
 run_stage conformance   "${CI_DIR}/conformance.sh"
 
 echo >&2
@@ -188,6 +189,31 @@ case "${OUTCOME[spec-immutability]}" in
   pass) ok   "spec-immutability: green" ;;
 esac
 
+# gitea-settings: the ONLY check that can see Gitea's own database (branch protection +
+# runner registration). A FAIL is real drift and always blocks -- that is the whole point.
+# A SKIP means no token or unreachable Gitea, which is an UNWIRED CREDENTIAL, not a defect
+# in the change under test. It is deliberately NOT in the strict-skips loop below: making an
+# absent secret block every PR is precisely the lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps
+# walking into (a required check with nothing able to satisfy it). So a skip denies a PASS
+# (exit 3) and says loudly what is unverified. Set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true once the
+# token is wired, and the skip becomes a block as it should.
+case "${OUTCOME[gitea-settings]}" in
+  fail) err "gitea-settings: Gitea DRIFTED from infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json -> blocks merge"; BLOCK=1 ;;
+  skip)
+    if truthy "${REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS:-false}"; then
+      err "gitea-settings: skipped and REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true -> blocks merge"
+      summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED** (no token) — blocks merge (REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true)"
+      BLOCK=1
+    else
+      warn "gitea-settings: skipped (no GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN) — branch protection and runner"
+      warn "  registration are UNVERIFIED. Both were silently wrong for a month. Wire the token"
+      warn "  (infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh), then set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true."
+      summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED** (no token — protection/runners unverified; not a pass)"
+      NOT_ESTABLISHED+=("gitea-settings")
+    fi ;;
+  pass) ok "gitea-settings: green" ;;
+esac
+
 # L0/L1 stages: any failure blocks. A SKIP here means a pinned tool is missing or a seam is
 # unwired — NEVER green. In CI (strict) that is a defect and blocks; on a workstation it
 # degrades to UNDETERMINED, which is still non-zero and still not a pass. render-golden is a

ci/gitea-settings.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+# ci/gitea-settings.sh — Stage: the Gitea platform settings that gate this repo still
+# match what git declares.
+#
+# WHY THIS STAGE EXISTS AT ALL
+# ----------------------------
+# Every other check in this repo reads the repository, the rendered manifests, or the
+# cluster. NONE of them can see Gitea's own database — and that is where branch
+# protection and runner registration live. On 2026-09-29 that blind spot was measured:
+#
+#   * `main` had NO branch protection, and
+#   * ZERO Actions runners were registered,
+#
+# for roughly a month, while DECISIONS-LOG.md recorded both as working and every agent
+# and human in the loop repeated that claim because the repository said so. PR #1 — the
+# first pull request this repo ever had — sat `pending` for 30.6 minutes with nothing to
+# execute it. Later the same day `enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` were turned
+# on and STILL did not bite, because `block_admin_merge_override` was false; PRs #5-#9
+# merged with zero approvals recorded against `required_approvals: 1`.
+#
+# Three separate failures, one shape: a setting that READ as enforced while not being, with
+# no mechanism anywhere that could notice. Scripts that ASSERT the desired state
+# (infra/gitea/*.sh) do not detect drift from it. This stage is the detector.
+#
+# WHAT IT ASSERTS
+#   1. every key in infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json `.protection` matches the
+#      LIVE rule at /repos/{repo}/branch_protections/{branch}, exactly;
+#   2. at least `.runners_online_min` Actions runners report status "online".
+#
+# (2) is not decoration. A required status check with no runner is the deadlock this repo
+# nearly walked into: every PR pends forever, including the one that would fix it.
+#
+# READ THE RULE OBJECT, NOT THE BRANCH VIEW. /repos/{repo}/branches/{branch} reports
+# `protected`, `enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` but NOT
+# `block_admin_merge_override` — it showed all-green while the rule was overridable by the
+# only account that merges. This stage queries /branch_protections/ deliberately.
+#
+# EXIT CODES (the gate contract)
+#   0  live Gitea matches the declaration
+#   1  DIVERGENCE — something drifted, or was never applied. Blocks the merge.
+#   3  SKIP — no token, or Gitea unreachable. Never a pass; see gate.sh, which treats this
+#      skip like spec-immutability's (UNDETERMINED, exit 3) rather than a hard block, so
+#      that an unwired credential cannot lock the repository.
+#
+# TO WIRE IT: create a Gitea repo secret GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN (a token that can read repo
+# settings) — infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh does it. Until then this stage skips LOUDLY and
+# the drift it exists to catch is still undetected.
+set -euo pipefail
+CI_DIR="$(cd "$(dirname "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}")" && pwd)"
+REPO_ROOT="$(cd "${CI_DIR}/.." && pwd)"
+# shellcheck disable=SC1091
+source "${CI_DIR}/lib.sh"
+
+log "Stage: Gitea platform settings match the declaration"
+
+DECL="${REPO_ROOT}/infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json"
+GITEA_URL="${GITEA_URL:-https://gitea.home.keithjackson.dev}"
+GITEA_REPO="${GITEA_REPO:-Home-Network/home-network-k3s-impl}"
+# SETTINGS_API_TOKEN, not GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN. Gitea RESERVES the `GITEA_` prefix for
+# secret names and rejects a PUT of one with HTTP 400 "invalid secret name" — the same way
+# GitHub reserves `GITHUB_`. The original name could therefore never be stored, and because
+# infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh sent that PUT to /dev/null and printed "stored" unconditionally,
+# it looked like it had worked. A token was minted, no secret existed, and this stage would
+# have skipped forever. GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN is still honoured for a local run.
+TOKEN="${SETTINGS_API_TOKEN:-${GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN:-}}"
+
+[ -f "$DECL" ] || die "declaration missing: ${DECL}"
+require_tool jq
+require_tool curl
+
+if [ -z "$TOKEN" ]; then
+  skip "SETTINGS_API_TOKEN is not set — cannot read the live Gitea rule."
+  skip "  Branch protection and runner registration are therefore UNVERIFIED. They were"
+  skip "  wrong, unnoticed, for a month (2026-09-29). Wire it: infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh"
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED — no token** (protection + runners UNVERIFIED; not a pass)"
+  exit 3
+fi
+
+api() { curl -sS --max-time 20 -H "Authorization: token ${TOKEN}" "$@"; }
+
+BRANCH="$(jq -r '.branch' "$DECL")"
+LIVE="$(api "${GITEA_URL}/api/v1/repos/${GITEA_REPO}/branch_protections/${BRANCH}" || true)"
+if [ -z "$LIVE" ] || ! jq -e 'type == "object" and has("branch_name")' >/dev/null 2>&1 <<<"$LIVE"; then
+  skip "could not read the branch-protection rule from ${GITEA_URL} (unreachable, or the token"
+  skip "  lacks permission). Not treating this as a pass."
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED — Gitea unreadable** (not a pass)"
+  exit 3
+fi
+
+RC=0
+
+# --- 1. every declared protection key must match the live rule, exactly ---------------
+while IFS= read -r key; do
+  want="$(jq -Sc --arg k "$key" '.protection[$k]' "$DECL")"
+  got="$(jq -Sc --arg k "$key" 'if has($k) then .[$k] else "<<ABSENT>>" end' <<<"$LIVE")"
+  if [ "$want" = "$got" ]; then
+    ok "  ${key} = ${got}"
+  else
+    err "  ${key}: DECLARED ${want} but LIVE is ${got}"
+    RC=1
+  fi
+done < <(jq -r '.protection | keys[]' "$DECL")
+
+# --- 2. a runner must actually be online ----------------------------------------------
+MIN="$(jq -r '.runners_online_min // 1' "$DECL")"
+RUNNERS="$(api "${GITEA_URL}/api/v1/admin/actions/runners" || true)"
+N="$(jq -r '[(.runners//[])[]|select(.status=="online")]|length' <<<"${RUNNERS:-{\}}" 2>/dev/null || echo 0)"
+if [ "${N:-0}" -ge "$MIN" ]; then
+  ok "  runners online: ${N} (>= ${MIN})"
+else
+  err "  runners online: ${N}, DECLARED minimum ${MIN}."
+  err "  A required status check with no runner leaves every PR pending forever —"
+  err "  including the PR that would fix it. This is the 2026-09-29 outage condition."
+  RC=1
+fi
+
+if [ "$RC" -eq 0 ]; then
+  ok "Gitea settings match the declaration."
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **green** (branch protection + runners match \`infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json\`)"
+else
+  err "Gitea has DRIFTED from infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json."
+  err "  Re-assert it (infra/gitea/require-gate.sh, block-admin-override.sh), or if the live"
+  err "  state is what you now want, change the DECLARATION in the same commit — deliberately."
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **DRIFT** — live Gitea does not match the declaration; blocks merge"
+fi
+exit "$RC"

infra/gitea/README.md

@@ -55,8 +55,27 @@ All four steps are complete and each was verified, not assumed:
 | 4. Collaborator + approvals | ✅ `jakman85` is owner; `required_approvals: 1` |
 
 Direct push to `main` was **provoked and rejected** (`pre-receive hook declined`) as
-`gitea-admin`, a site admin — so protection is not merely declared, it holds for the account
+`gitea-admin`, a site admin — so push protection is not merely declared, it holds for the
-agents authenticate as.
+account agents authenticate as.
+
+### 5. Block the admin override — the step the first pass MISSED
+
+`enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` were set on 2026-09-29 and **still did not
+bite**, because `block_admin_merge_override` was `false`. Gitea lets repo admins override
+merge requirements without it, and `jakman85` holds `owner` — so the two settings that looked
+like the gate were overridable by precisely the account that merges.
+
+**The evidence was sitting in plain sight:** PRs #5 through #9 all merged with
+`required_approvals: 1` in force and **zero approvals recorded on any of them**. Checking the
+*branch* view (`/branches/main`) hid this — it does not expose the field. Read the rule object
+(`/branch_protections/main`) and enumerate its keys.
+
+> **Do not probe for field names you assume exist.** This Gitea (1.24.3) has no
+> `apply_to_admins`; asking `jq` for it returns `null`, which reads like "set to false" but
+> means "key absent". Enumerate with `to_entries` and act on what is really there.
+
+Now `block_admin_merge_override: true`. **That is still only a setting, not evidence** — it is
+proven when a green PR is REFUSED a merge until approved, and not before.
 
 ### `require-gate.sh` / `verify-then-enforce.sh`
 
@@ -67,6 +86,32 @@ enabling enforcement and probing the push. `require-gate.sh` is the enforcement
 
 Re-run `verify-then-enforce.sh` after any future change to the act-runner Deployment.
 
+### `expected-branch-protection.json` + `ci/gitea-settings.sh` — the detector
+
+`expected-branch-protection.json` **declares** the desired rule. `ci/gitea-settings.sh` runs as
+a merge-gate stage, reads the LIVE rule, and **fails the gate on any divergence** — plus asserts
+at least one runner is online. It is the only thing in this repository that can see Gitea's own
+database.
+
+It reads `/branch_protections/main`, not `/branches/main`: the branch view does **not** expose
+`block_admin_merge_override`, and it showed all-green for hours while the rule was overridable.
+
+Behaviour, proven by test rather than assumed:
+
+| Situation | Exit | Effect |
+|---|---|---|
+| live matches the declaration | 0 | green |
+| any key drifted, or no runner online | 1 | **blocks the merge** |
+| no `GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN`, or Gitea unreachable | 3 | skips **loudly**; never a pass, never a block |
+
+The skip is deliberately *not* a block: an unwired credential blocking every PR is the
+lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps hitting. Wire the token with `set-ci-token.sh`, confirm
+the stage goes **green on a real PR**, and only then set `REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true` in
+`gate.yml` so a future missing token blocks instead of skipping.
+
+**Changing the declaration is how you change policy.** If the live state is what you now want,
+edit this JSON in the same commit — deliberately, in review — rather than letting the two drift.
+
 ### Why these scripts exist at all, and what is still missing
 
 Gitea's repo settings live in **its own database**, not in anything Flux reconciles or the
@@ -75,10 +120,12 @@ the root cause of the entire 2026-09-29 session: branch protection was off and t
 gone for a month while the log recorded both as working, and **no check existed that could
 have caught it.**
 
-These scripts encode the desired state and can re-assert it, but they are not a detector. The
+These scripts encode the desired state and can re-assert it; `ci/gitea-settings.sh` above is the
-durable fix is a conformance check that reads the live Gitea API and fails when it diverges
+**detector** that turns divergence from a silent, invisible failure into a loud one. It closes the
-from what is declared here — turning a class of silent, invisible failure into a loud one.
+root cause of the 2026-09-29 session.
-**That check does not exist yet and is the highest-value remaining work in this directory.**
+
+It is only as good as its wiring: **until `GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN` exists it skips**, and a skipped
+detector detects nothing. That is the remaining step.
 
 ## Historical sequence (kept for context)
 

infra/gitea/block-admin-override.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+# Stop repository admins from overriding the merge requirements on `main`.
+#
+# WHY. Gitea lets repo admins override branch-protection merge requirements unless
+# `block_admin_merge_override` is set. It was FALSE, and jakman85 holds `owner` -- so
+# required_approvals and the required status check were both overridable by the one account
+# that actually merges. Evidence: PRs #5-#9 all merged with ZERO approvals recorded against
+# `required_approvals: 1`.
+#
+# NOTE ON FIELD NAMES: this Gitea (1.24.3) has NO `apply_to_admins` field. Querying it with jq
+# returns null, which reads like "set to false" but actually means "key absent". Enumerate the
+# real keys (`to_entries`) rather than probing names you assume exist.
+#
+# Recoverable: an owner can PATCH this back to false if it gets in the way.
+set -euo pipefail
+HOST=gitea.home.keithjackson.dev; OWNER=Home-Network; REPO=home-network-k3s-impl
+creds="$(printf 'protocol=https\nhost=%s\n\n' "$HOST" | git credential fill)"
+U="$(sed -n 's/^username=//p' <<<"$creds")"; P="$(sed -n 's/^password=//p' <<<"$creds")"
+api() { curl -sS --config <(printf 'user = "%s:%s"\n' "$U" "$P") "$@"; }
+B="https://${HOST}/api/v1/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/branch_protections/main"
+
+echo "==> before: block_admin_merge_override = $(api "$B" | jq -r .block_admin_merge_override)"
+api -X PATCH -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
+  -d '{"block_admin_merge_override": true}' "$B" >/dev/null
+AFTER=$(api "$B" | jq -r .block_admin_merge_override)
+echo "==> after:  block_admin_merge_override = $AFTER"
+[ "$AFTER" = true ] || { echo "PATCH did not take -- do not record this as enforced." >&2; exit 1; }
+
+api "$B" | jq -r '{enable_push,enable_status_check,status_check_contexts,required_approvals,block_admin_merge_override}'
+cat <<'NOTE'
+
+NOW PROVE IT -- the setting is not the evidence. On the next PR:
+  * let the gate go green, then try to merge WITHOUT approving it.
+  * Gitea must REFUSE. If it merges, this still is not doing its job.
+Do not record approvals as enforced until you have seen a merge refused.
+NOTE

infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+{
+  "_comment": "DECLARED desired state of Gitea branch protection on main. ci/gitea-settings.sh fails the merge gate when the LIVE Gitea diverges from this. Gitea settings live in Gitea database - invisible to Flux, unreadable by every other check - so this file plus that check are the only drift detection that exists for them.",
+  "_generated": "2026-09-29 from the live rule, after the session that found protection OFF and zero runners for a month",
+  "branch": "main",
+  "runners_online_min": 1,
+  "protection": {
+    "enable_push": false,
+    "enable_push_whitelist": false,
+    "enable_merge_whitelist": false,
+    "enable_status_check": true,
+    "status_check_contexts": [
+      "gate / gate (pull_request)"
+    ],
+    "required_approvals": 1,
+    "enable_approvals_whitelist": false,
+    "block_admin_merge_override": true,
+    "block_on_rejected_reviews": true,
+    "dismiss_stale_approvals": true
+  }
+}

infra/gitea/require-gate.sh

@@ -12,6 +12,15 @@
 #   * NOT `gate / conformance (*)` -- that job is `if: false`, and a skipped Gitea job reports
 #     SUCCESS ("Has been skipped"). Requiring it would pass VACUOUSLY forever while nothing
 #     ran, which under HARD RULE 4 is worse than a deadlock: a deadlock is loud.
+# block_admin_merge_override: true is LOAD-BEARING and was missing on the first pass. Gitea
+# lets repo admins override merge requirements without it, so required_approvals and the
+# required status check are both bypassable by exactly the account that does the merging.
+# Measured: PRs #5-#9 merged with ZERO approvals recorded against required_approvals: 1.
+#
+# FIELD NAMES: this Gitea (1.24.3) has NO `apply_to_admins`. Asking jq for it returns null,
+# which reads like "false" but means "key absent" -- enumerate real keys with `to_entries`
+# instead of probing names you assume exist. That mistake cost a wasted PATCH.
+#
 #   * NOT the `(push)` variant -- after PR #6 there are no per-branch push runs at all, so a
 #     PR would never produce that context.
 set -euo pipefail
@@ -28,7 +37,8 @@ jq -n '{
   required_approvals: 1,
   block_on_rejected_reviews: true,
   dismiss_stale_approvals: true,
-  block_on_outdated_branch: false
+  block_on_outdated_branch: false,
+  block_admin_merge_override: true
 }' | api -X PATCH -H 'Content-Type: application/json' --data @- \
   "https://${HOST}/api/v1/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/branch_protections/main" >/dev/null
 

infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+# Mint a Gitea API token and store it as the repo Actions secret GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN,
+# so ci/gitea-settings.sh can read the live branch-protection rule during the gate.
+#
+# The token value is NEVER printed. It goes from the token API into the secrets API and
+# nowhere else -- not to stdout, not to a file, not into an agent transcript.
+#
+# Scope: `read:repository` + `read:admin` are what the check needs (the rule object, and the
+# runner list). Gitea token scopes are coarse; grant the least that works on your version and
+# confirm the check goes green rather than assuming the scope name.
+set -euo pipefail
+HOST=gitea.home.keithjackson.dev; OWNER=Home-Network; REPO=home-network-k3s-impl
+# NOT GITEA_* — Gitea reserves that prefix for secret names and returns HTTP 400
+# "invalid secret name". The first version of this script used GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN, sent the
+# PUT to /dev/null, and printed "stored" regardless; the secret never existed and nobody knew.
+SECRET=SETTINGS_API_TOKEN
+NAME="ci-gitea-settings-$(date +%Y%m%d%H%M%S)"
+creds="$(printf 'protocol=https\nhost=%s\n\n' "$HOST" | git credential fill)"
+U="$(sed -n 's/^username=//p' <<<"$creds")"; P="$(sed -n 's/^password=//p' <<<"$creds")"
+basic() { curl -sS --config <(printf 'user = "%s:%s"\n' "$U" "$P") "$@"; }
+
+echo "==> minting token '${NAME}' as ${U}"
+TOKEN="$(basic -X POST -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
+  -d "{\"name\":\"${NAME}\",\"scopes\":[\"read:repository\",\"read:admin\"]}" \
+  "https://${HOST}/api/v1/users/${U}/tokens" | jq -r '.sha1 // empty')"
+[ -n "$TOKEN" ] || { echo "token creation failed (check scopes for your Gitea version)" >&2; exit 1; }
+echo "==> got a ${#TOKEN}-character token (value not shown)"
+
+echo "==> storing it as repo Actions secret ${SECRET}"
+code="$(basic -o /tmp/set-ci-token.out -w '%{http_code}' -X PUT -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
+  -d "$(jq -n --arg d "$TOKEN" '{data:$d}')" \
+  "https://${HOST}/api/v1/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/actions/secrets/${SECRET}")"
+unset TOKEN
+if [ "$code" != 201 ] && [ "$code" != 204 ]; then
+  echo "   PUT failed: HTTP ${code} -- $(head -c 200 /tmp/set-ci-token.out)" >&2
+  rm -f /tmp/set-ci-token.out; exit 1
+fi
+rm -f /tmp/set-ci-token.out
+
+# VERIFY BY READING IT BACK. curl -sS exits 0 on an HTTP error, so without this the script
+# reports success for a store that never happened -- which is exactly what it did.
+names="$(basic "https://${HOST}/api/v1/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/actions/secrets" \
+        | jq -rc '[.. | objects | select(has("name")) | .name] | unique')"
+grep -q "$SECRET" <<<"$names" \
+  || { echo "   stored HTTP ${code} but ${SECRET} is NOT in ${names} -- refusing to claim success" >&2; exit 1; }
+echo "==> stored and VERIFIED present: ${names}"
+
+cat <<'NOTE'
+
+Next:
+  1. .gitea/workflows/gate.yml already passes this secret to the gate step.
+  2. Open any PR and confirm the gate prints "gitea-settings: green" -- it SKIPS silently
+     without the token, so a green run is the only proof the wiring works.
+  3. THEN set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true in gate.yml, so a future missing token BLOCKS
+     instead of skipping. Do that only after you have seen it green, or you lock the repo.
+NOTE