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 2026-10-14T19:15:30.012544Z	e728d69	Manual request
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-14T19:16:31.302765Z	e728d69	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: 66a3bfa8-bc2c-4cec-99f8-5bec5996a237

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1f28132 and e728d69.

📒 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

• Documentation
  • Wiki publishing automation now runs for pull requests, in addition to updates to the main branch and manual runs.
  • The publishing configuration has changed. These updates affect how documentation publishing is handled; no application functionality changes are noted.

The wiki workflow now runs for pull requests as well as pushes to main and manual triggers. It uses a pinned reusable workflow, updates its permissions, and removes inherited secrets. The wiki submodule reference and its .gitmodules entry are removed.

Changes: Wiki workflow

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Wiki workflow and submodule configuration .github/workflows/wiki.yml, .github/wiki, .gitmodules	The workflow adds pull-request triggers, changes permissions, and switches to a pinned reusable workflow. The submodule reference and configuration entry are removed.

Priority: ➖ Normal

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

Change: Bug fix

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to e728d

No actionable merge-blocking risk remains in the reviewed workflow and submodule changes.

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 and concisely describes the main change: restoring Wiki publication without the Git submodule.
Description check		The description directly explains the workflow replacement, submodule removal, publication rules, pinning, and validation for the changeset.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• 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 checks the workflow’s trail
Pull requests join the push-mail
A pinned path now leads the way
The submodule hops away
Green leaves mark the change today}

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

[coisa]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. You're on a roll.

Reviewed commit: e728d6949e

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: e728d6949e

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.