release: Support alpha, beta, and RC releases

[bep]

No description provided.

[gemini-code-assist]

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

[github-actions]

AI Detection Analysis 🔍

Confidence Score: 40%

Reasoning: The content of the pull request appears highly domain-specific, involving nuanced logic for software versioning (including pre-release types such as alpha, beta, and RC) and alignment with Git practices like deriving version numbers from branch names. The coding style, comments, and logic show technical precision, yet also exhibit some repetitive patterns and generic phrasing that could be the output of an LLM-assisted workflow. However, there are signs of real-world experience and integration, which suggest human authorship or at least strong human oversight.

Key Indicators:

• Detailed and domain-aware logic like handling Git branches and version suffixes indicates human insight.
• Use of realistic error handling, logging, and function structuring reflects a solid understanding of conventional Go programming practices.
• Comments such as "Note that version is only used for testing. In CI we derive the version from the branch name." show contextual awareness.
• The commit message and PR formatting are methodical and might mirror an established contribution pattern, which AI could replicate.
• Minor syntactic inconsistencies (e.g., variable duplication) suggest hand-written code that wasn't perfectly polished by an AI.

Overall, this looks like a human-authored PR possibly helped along by code completion tools but not fully AI-generated.

✅ No strong indicators of AI generation detected