fix(wiki): restore publication without a submodule

[coisa]

The current Wiki workflow fails before executing any jobs: its old entry point no longer supports workflow_call. Adopt the direct-publication workflow derived from php-fast-forward/container#15 and shared in php-fast-forward/dev-tools#366.

Generate API Markdown with read-only credentials on PRs; only main can publish through an isolated checkout of the separate Wiki repository. Remove the .github/wiki gitlink and its matching .gitmodules entry, preserving the remote Wiki/history. The renderer is installed separately; consumer Composer constraints, lock files and plugin allowlists remain unchanged.

The caller is pinned to c44339acd9b09b1a7f2249cceb8928e5e93cf42b, the reviewed implementation commit of dev-tools#366. This makes the generation checks executable before that shared PR merges; merge the shared change first so normal dev-tools:sync also stops invoking wiki --init.

Validation: Composer validate --strict --no-plugins, actionlint and git diff --check passed. The shared actual publisher passed 54 offline assertions and DevTools passed 717 tests / 2,201 assertions with 91.83% coverage. GitHub checks exercise this repository's real Markdown generation. Publication is main-only and remains to be verified after merge.

Follow-up: use the isolated pinned renderer, with no Composer manifest changes in this PR. The shared release flow now skips legacy pointer refresh when the Wiki gitlink is absent.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-14T19:15:37.912050Z	61f979c	Manual request
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-14T19:17:02.042193Z	61f979c	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

• Configuration used: Organization UI
• Review profile: ASSERTIVE
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: 4c1a744b-df00-4ff0-b38e-0ff480aace20

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9d148a7 and 61f979c.

📒 Files selected for processing: 1

• .github/workflows/wiki.yml

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

📝 Summary

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated the automated wiki publishing workflow to use a fixed workflow version and narrower permissions.
  • The workflow continues to run on pushes to the main branch, pull requests, and manual requests.
  • Removed the wiki submodule reference. These changes do not alter application features.

The wiki workflow now runs on pull requests, retains its push and manual triggers, and calls a pinned reusable workflow with fewer permissions and no inherited secrets. The .github/wiki submodule reference and .gitmodules entry were removed.

Changes: Wiki workflow

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Wiki workflow and submodule references .github/workflows/wiki.yml, .github/wiki, .gitmodules	The workflow adds a pull request trigger and removes the pages and id-token permissions. It calls wiki-direct.yml at a pinned commit and no longer inherits secrets. The .github/wiki submodule reference and its .gitmodules entry were removed.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes

Change: Bug fix

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 61f97

Pull requests generate Wiki Markdown with read-only repository access, while publication is limited to main. No material merge risk is established.

Pre-merge checks: 5

Passed checks: 5 passed

Check name	Status	Explanation
Docstring Coverage		No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Title check		The title clearly describes the primary change: restoring Wiki publication without the removed submodule.
Description check		The description directly explains the workflow replacement, submodule removal, publication rules, pinned dependency, and validation results.

✨ Finishing Touches: 💡 1

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

🛠️ Fix failing CI checks: 💡

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

• 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

_{A rabbit checked the workflow call,
And watched the pull requests roll in.
The wiki link left the burrow,
While fewer permissions remained.
Then carrots hopped into the queue.}

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

[coisa]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next?

Reviewed commit: 61f979cd7b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggered

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 61f979cd7b

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

• You comment "@codex security review"
• A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.