mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-09-22 12:50:50 +02:00
v1.87.3.0 fix: bind review evidence to the reviewed tree (#2875)
* fix(review): bind evidence to completed unchanged review passes * fix(review): keep unresolved Codex findings unverified * docs: update review evidence documentation for v1.87.3.0 * test(cso): let Windows integration finish within subprocess budgets * docs: update project documentation for v1.87.3.0 --------- Co-authored-by: garrytan <19957+garrytan@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
@@ -22,20 +22,27 @@ codex-plan-review):
|
||||
|
||||
1. Find the most recent entry within the last 7 days.
|
||||
2. **Content-first rule (diff-scoped rows only: `review`, `adversarial-review`,
|
||||
`codex-review`, ship-stage entries).** If the entry has a `wtree` field AND it
|
||||
equals the `---WTREE---` section of the output → **CURRENT**, full stop.
|
||||
Identical working-tree content, regardless of commit count, rebase, amend, or
|
||||
whether it was committed yet (wtree equality alone proves identical content) —
|
||||
skip steps 3-4 for this entry. Never apply the wtree rule to plan-tier rows (plan-eng-review,
|
||||
plan-ceo-review, plan-design-review): those grade a plan file, not the repo
|
||||
tree — they keep the 7-day logic and the commit heuristic below.
|
||||
`codex-review`, ship-stage entries, `design-review-lite`).** Use the helper's
|
||||
computed `review_freshness.status` and show its `reason`. Only **CURRENT**
|
||||
certifies a completed clean pass whose start/end `wtree` still matches
|
||||
`---WTREE---`, regardless of commit count, rebase, or amend.
|
||||
**STALE** or **UNVERIFIED** (including legacy log-only rows, missing start
|
||||
captures, incomplete/nonconverged passes, and unresolved findings) is a red
|
||||
review warning. If `review_freshness` is missing, grade UNVERIFIED.
|
||||
Never fall back to commit distance for a diff row, even at HEAD/0 commits;
|
||||
skip steps 3-4 for ALL diff rows. Show `cycles`, `completed`, `converged`, and
|
||||
per-source/phase missing coverage when present; an unknown value is not a pass.
|
||||
Ship telemetry reports metrics, not review coverage; it never satisfies a review row.
|
||||
Plan-tier rows (plan-eng-review, plan-ceo-review, plan-design-review,
|
||||
codex-plan-review) grade a plan file — they retain the 7-day logic and commit
|
||||
heuristic below. Never use repo fingerprints to certify a plan.
|
||||
3. Extract its `commit` field.
|
||||
4. Compare against current HEAD: `git rev-list --count STORED_COMMIT..HEAD`.
|
||||
**If this command fails** (the stored commit was rebased away and is
|
||||
unreachable) → grade **UNKNOWN** and treat as STALE. Do not error out of the
|
||||
readiness check.
|
||||
|
||||
**Staleness rules (fallback path):**
|
||||
**Staleness rules (plan-tier fallback only):**
|
||||
- 0 commits since review → CURRENT
|
||||
- 1-3 commits since review → RECENT (yellow if those commits touch code, not just docs)
|
||||
- 4+ commits since review → STALE (red — review may not reflect current code)
|
||||
@@ -49,8 +56,7 @@ git log --oneline STORED_COMMIT..HEAD
|
||||
If any commits after the review contain words like "fix", "refactor", "rewrite",
|
||||
"overhaul", or touch more than 5 files — flag as **STALE (significant changes
|
||||
since review)**. The review was done on different code than what's about to merge.
|
||||
(Skip this check for entries already graded CURRENT by the content-first rule —
|
||||
same content is same content.)
|
||||
(Diff rows already have their computed grade; commit history cannot upgrade it.)
|
||||
|
||||
**Also check for adversarial review (`codex-review`).** If codex-review has been run
|
||||
and is CURRENT, mention it in the readiness report as an extra confidence signal.
|
||||
@@ -58,8 +64,8 @@ If not run, note as informational (not a blocker): "No adversarial review on rec
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.5a-bis: Inline review offer
|
||||
|
||||
**We are extra careful about deploys.** If engineering review is STALE (4+ commits since)
|
||||
or NOT RUN, offer to run a quick review inline before proceeding.
|
||||
**We are extra careful about deploys.** If engineering review is STALE, UNVERIFIED,
|
||||
UNKNOWN, or NOT RUN, offer to run a quick review inline before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
Use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
- **Re-ground:** "I noticed {the code review is stale / no code review has been run} on this branch. Since this code is about to go to production, I'd like to do a quick safety check on the diff before we merge. This is one of the ways I make sure nothing ships that shouldn't."
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -20,20 +20,27 @@ codex-plan-review):
|
||||
|
||||
1. Find the most recent entry within the last 7 days.
|
||||
2. **Content-first rule (diff-scoped rows only: `review`, `adversarial-review`,
|
||||
`codex-review`, ship-stage entries).** If the entry has a `wtree` field AND it
|
||||
equals the `---WTREE---` section of the output → **CURRENT**, full stop.
|
||||
Identical working-tree content, regardless of commit count, rebase, amend, or
|
||||
whether it was committed yet (wtree equality alone proves identical content) —
|
||||
skip steps 3-4 for this entry. Never apply the wtree rule to plan-tier rows (plan-eng-review,
|
||||
plan-ceo-review, plan-design-review): those grade a plan file, not the repo
|
||||
tree — they keep the 7-day logic and the commit heuristic below.
|
||||
`codex-review`, ship-stage entries, `design-review-lite`).** Use the helper's
|
||||
computed `review_freshness.status` and show its `reason`. Only **CURRENT**
|
||||
certifies a completed clean pass whose start/end `wtree` still matches
|
||||
`---WTREE---`, regardless of commit count, rebase, or amend.
|
||||
**STALE** or **UNVERIFIED** (including legacy log-only rows, missing start
|
||||
captures, incomplete/nonconverged passes, and unresolved findings) is a red
|
||||
review warning. If `review_freshness` is missing, grade UNVERIFIED.
|
||||
Never fall back to commit distance for a diff row, even at HEAD/0 commits;
|
||||
skip steps 3-4 for ALL diff rows. Show `cycles`, `completed`, `converged`, and
|
||||
per-source/phase missing coverage when present; an unknown value is not a pass.
|
||||
Ship telemetry reports metrics, not review coverage; it never satisfies a review row.
|
||||
Plan-tier rows (plan-eng-review, plan-ceo-review, plan-design-review,
|
||||
codex-plan-review) grade a plan file — they retain the 7-day logic and commit
|
||||
heuristic below. Never use repo fingerprints to certify a plan.
|
||||
3. Extract its `commit` field.
|
||||
4. Compare against current HEAD: `git rev-list --count STORED_COMMIT..HEAD`.
|
||||
**If this command fails** (the stored commit was rebased away and is
|
||||
unreachable) → grade **UNKNOWN** and treat as STALE. Do not error out of the
|
||||
readiness check.
|
||||
|
||||
**Staleness rules (fallback path):**
|
||||
**Staleness rules (plan-tier fallback only):**
|
||||
- 0 commits since review → CURRENT
|
||||
- 1-3 commits since review → RECENT (yellow if those commits touch code, not just docs)
|
||||
- 4+ commits since review → STALE (red — review may not reflect current code)
|
||||
@@ -47,8 +54,7 @@ git log --oneline STORED_COMMIT..HEAD
|
||||
If any commits after the review contain words like "fix", "refactor", "rewrite",
|
||||
"overhaul", or touch more than 5 files — flag as **STALE (significant changes
|
||||
since review)**. The review was done on different code than what's about to merge.
|
||||
(Skip this check for entries already graded CURRENT by the content-first rule —
|
||||
same content is same content.)
|
||||
(Diff rows already have their computed grade; commit history cannot upgrade it.)
|
||||
|
||||
**Also check for adversarial review (`codex-review`).** If codex-review has been run
|
||||
and is CURRENT, mention it in the readiness report as an extra confidence signal.
|
||||
@@ -56,8 +62,8 @@ If not run, note as informational (not a blocker): "No adversarial review on rec
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.5a-bis: Inline review offer
|
||||
|
||||
**We are extra careful about deploys.** If engineering review is STALE (4+ commits since)
|
||||
or NOT RUN, offer to run a quick review inline before proceeding.
|
||||
**We are extra careful about deploys.** If engineering review is STALE, UNVERIFIED,
|
||||
UNKNOWN, or NOT RUN, offer to run a quick review inline before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
Use AskUserQuestion:
|
||||
- **Re-ground:** "I noticed {the code review is stale / no code review has been run} on this branch. Since this code is about to go to production, I'd like to do a quick safety check on the diff before we merge. This is one of the ways I make sure nothing ships that shouldn't."
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user