ci: the deploy health check must follow redirects

jecreativ.ro's first production deploy went red for behaving exactly as
configured: it runs in UnderConstruction mode, so `/` correctly answers 302
to the placeholder, and the check asserted a bare 200.

Now `-L` follows the redirect and the FINAL code is asserted. A redirect
means the app is up and routing, which is what this step is for; a real
failure (502, 500, refused) still reports.

The version gate itself was right throughout -- it read 1bafc14 from the
production host, including through the under-construction middleware.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WpTYCBLH58XzrM7n3xPJ5N

.gitea/workflows/build.yml

@@ -169,10 +169,15 @@ jobs:
             staging)    HOST=192.168.1.111 ;;
             production) HOST=192.168.1.101 ;;
           esac
+          # `-L` follows redirects and we assert on the FINAL code, because a 302 from `/`
+          # is a healthy answer for a site running in UnderConstruction mode -- it means the
+          # app is up and routing. Asserting a bare 200 failed jecreativ.ro's first
+          # production deploy for doing exactly what it was configured to do.
+          #
           # `|| CODE=000` for the same reason as above: curl exiting non-zero on a
           # connection failure must produce a reportable code, not kill the step before
           # it can say what went wrong. (`-s` without `-f` already tolerates 4xx/5xx.)
-          CODE=$(curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' -m 20 "http://${HOST}:${WEB_PORT}/") || CODE=000
+          CODE=$(curl -sL -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' -m 20 "http://${HOST}:${WEB_PORT}/") || CODE=000
           if [ "${CODE}" != "200" ]; then
             echo "::error::Home page returned ${CODE}."
             exit 1