ci: sign builds for distribution via sparkle #165
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ethanndickson
force-pushed
the
ethan/sign-for-sparkle
branch
from
1c35039 to
abdcead
Compare
deansheather
approved these changes
May 23, 2025
Merge activity
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
First PR for #47.
To test the later components, we need a release build and a preview build signed with this key. So, this needs to be merged first.
I've tested the release script with a dry-run, and validated the pkg passes
sparkle/sign_update --verify, and that the app still works in a VM (specifically checking that signing it didn't invalidate the notarization, but I don't think signing it modifies it's contents, it just checks the signature matches the embedded public key)