GloriousFlywheel Forgejo Honey Proof 2026-04-20
This note records the one honest Forgejo adapter proof completed on
2026-04-20 for TIN-206.
What Was Proven
- a disposable Forgejo instance can run on the
honeycluster - a repo-scoped Forgejo runner can register against that in-cluster instance
- a push to a repo with a
.forgejo/workflows/file triggers a real workflow - the workflow can be claimed and executed by a runner pod on
honey
Proof Shape
- Namespace:
forgejo-proof - Forgejo server image:
data.forgejo.org/forgejo/forgejo:14 - Runner image:
data.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner:11 - Job container engine:
docker:27-dindsidecar in the same pod - Repo:
gfadmin/gloriousflywheel-forgejo-proof - Runner name:
honey-forgejo-proof - Workflow:
.forgejo/workflows/validate.yml - Triggering commit:
e0ad931c86220eb8c95489d9f5e0fe74ac7afce6 - Workflow run:
1 - Run status:
success - Run timing: started
2026-04-20T12:14:08Z, stopped2026-04-20T12:14:35Z
Evidence
- the Forgejo API reported workflow run
1forgfadmin/gloriousflywheel-forgejo-proofwith statussuccess - the runner logs showed the
honeypod claimingtask 1 repo is gfadmin/gloriousflywheel-forgejo-proof - the runner completed cleanup for job
proveafter the successful run
Caveats
- this was a disposable proof namespace, not a durable environment
- Forgejo server storage used
emptyDir, so restart/redeploy destroys state - the runner was repo-scoped only, not org-scoped, account-scoped, or shared
- the job engine used a privileged DinD sidecar with insecure local TCP inside the pod; that is acceptable for proof work, not a production default
- no Attic cache path, Bazel remote cache path, ingress, TLS, or SSO story was exercised
- no OpenTofu module or long-lived operator automation was added for this path
- this proves adapter compatibility on
honey; it does not prove a production Forgejo fleet, multi-tenant hardening, or Codeberg-hosted CI parity
Bottom Line
The Forgejo adapter is no longer hypothetical. One disposable repo-scoped proof
ran successfully on honey.
The adapter remains compatibility-only. It should still be described as a proof path rather than a production surface until it has durable state, an operator story, and a non-disposable runner model.