[renovate]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change	Pending
jdx/mise-action	action	patch	v5.2.0 → v5.2.2	v5.2.4 (+1)

---

Release Notes

jdx/mise-action

v5.2.2: : Include conf.d config fragments in the cache key

Compare Source

The cache key now includes mise conf.d/*.toml config fragments, so changing one of them invalidates the cache.

Fixed

• Editing a conf.d fragment now invalidates the cache. mise can load config from single-file fragments in conf.d/ directories, but the action didn't hash those files when it built the cache key. As a result, adding or changing tools in a fragment could restore an outdated cache. The cache key now also hashes conf.d/*.toml files under .config/mise/, .mise/ and mise/. If your repo already uses these fragments, the cache will miss once after you upgrade. (#​698 by @​rileymichael)

New Contributors

• @​rileymichael made their first contribution in #​698

Full Changelog: jdx/mise-action@v5.2.1...v5.2.2

v5.2.1: : Require the signed packslip for mise 2026.9.3 and later

Compare Source

The action now refuses to install mise 2026.9.3 or later if the release's signed packslip is missing. This closes a gap where verification could be downgraded to the weaker checksum check.

Fixed

• A missing packslip no longer weakens the check on recent mise releases. v5.2.0 started checking the mise binary against the release's signed packslip.sigstore.json. If that file wasn't found, though, the action quietly fell back to the minisign-signed SHASUMS256 checksums. Anyone who could hide the file could force the weaker check. Every mise release from 2026.9.3 on includes a packslip, so for those versions a missing bundle now stops the install with an error like this:

  mise v2026.10.11 must ship a signed packslip, but https://github.com/jdx/mise/releases/download/v2026.10.11/packslip.sigstore.json was not found
  

  Releases before 2026.9.3 don't include a packslip, so they're still checked against the signed checksums. A version string that isn't three dot-separated numbers also requires a packslip. If you set the sha256 input, it still takes precedence over both checks. A packslip that fails verification still never falls back to the checksums. (#​695 by @​jdx)

Full Changelog: jdx/mise-action@v5.2.0...v5.2.1

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (in timezone America/Chicago)

• Branch creation
  • Only on Friday (* * * * 5)
• Automerge
  • At any time (no schedule defined)

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR was generated by Mend Renovate. View the repository job log.

[greptile-apps]

This PR does not match any of the 1 configured review trigger rule.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Bot user detected.

To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

Run configuration

• Source mode: Auto
• Repository: Unavailable
• Branch: Unavailable
• File: No configuration file from this repository applied
• Commit: Unavailable
• Layers: Central YAML (base), Organization UI (inherited)
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: 91322af7-666a-43a4-b379-101b6a4c1cff

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}