ci(sdk): move acceptance to Hosting and retain publish-on-merge

[swkeever]

Summary

Move acceptance ownership to Hosting. Remove this SDK's canonical feature copies, live acceptance bindings, binding-only tests, runners, and unused dependencies. Keep native implementation unit, type, build, package, and quality-policy checks.

A maintainer manually merges the Release Please version PR. Release Please still creates the stable tag/GitHub release, and the existing trusted publisher runs native checks and publishes automatically. Remove the step that enables automatic merging of version PRs. Hosting acceptance runs independently against distributions built from SDK main.

Coordination

Depends on https://github.com/Kong/volcano-hosting/pull/1371. Land the Hosting acceptance migration before removing SDK-owned runners. Staging account setup is tracked separately in https://github.com/Kong/volcano-hosting/pull/1370.

This replaces the earlier production acceptance / postmerge publication gate proposal. No production fixtures, cross-repository release dispatch, published acceptance runner, or extra publication gate is added. No releases or registry publications were performed.

Verification

• 2,281 native tests passed.
• Mypy, basedpyright, full Ruff lint/format checks, quality policy, wheel/sdist package checks and installed quickstarts passed.
• Release Please workflow passes actionlint.

The Hosting runner installed a built distribution in an isolated environment and discovered all 45 shared scenarios. That check does not execute live staging acceptance; the live run is pending dedicated staging-account setup.

[swkeever]

@codex review

[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 2026-09-24T21:32:08.542659Z	9b98829	Manual request
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-24T21:32:01.704651Z	9b98829	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.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggered

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

Reviewed commit: 9b988294b7

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.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 👍

Reviewed commit: 9b988294b7

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".