CalvinBackup/gstack
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git synced 2026-05-07 05:56:41 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fix: let /review satisfy ship readiness gate (#280)

Browse Source 
- Add Step 5.8 to /review: persist review outcome to review log
- Update shared REVIEW_DASHBOARD resolver: accept both `review` and
  `plan-eng-review` as valid Eng Review sources
- Update ship abort text to mention both review options
- Add 4 validation tests for persistence, propagation, and abort text

Based on PR #338 by @malikrohail. DRY improvement per eng review:
updated shared resolver instead of creating duplicate.

Refs #280.
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
2026-03-23 07:16:09 -07:00
parent 3d1e8e0eac
commit 9809d50ac2
11 changed files with 100 additions and 33 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
ship/SKILL.md
+3 -3
View File
@@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ After completing the review, read the review log and config to display the dashb
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-read
```
Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, adversarial-review, codex-review, codex-plan-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For the Adversarial row, show whichever is more recent between `adversarial-review` (new auto-scaled) and `codex-review` (legacy). For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between `plan-design-review` (full visual audit) and `design-review-lite` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite, adversarial-review, codex-review, codex-plan-review). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For the Eng Review row, show whichever is more recent between `review` (diff-scoped pre-landing review) and `plan-eng-review` (plan-stage architecture review). Append "(DIFF)" or "(PLAN)" to the status to distinguish. For the Adversarial row, show whichever is more recent between `adversarial-review` (new auto-scaled) and `codex-review` (legacy). For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between `plan-design-review` (full visual audit) and `design-review-lite` (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:
```
+====================================================================+
@@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, pl
- **Outside Voice (optional):** Independent plan review from a different AI model. Offered after all review sections complete in /plan-ceo-review and /plan-eng-review. Falls back to Claude subagent if Codex is unavailable. Never gates shipping.
**Verdict logic:**
- **CLEARED**: Eng Review has >= 1 entry within 7 days with status "clean" (or \`skip_eng_review\` is \`true\`)
- **CLEARED**: Eng Review has >= 1 entry within 7 days from either \`review\` or \`plan-eng-review\` with status "clean" (or \`skip_eng_review\` is \`true\`)
- **NOT CLEARED**: Eng Review missing, stale (>7 days), or has open issues
- CEO, Design, and Codex reviews are shown for context but never block shipping
- If \`skip_eng_review\` config is \`true\`, Eng Review shows "SKIPPED (global)" and verdict is CLEARED
@@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ If the Eng Review is NOT "CLEAR":
2. **If no override exists,** use AskUserQuestion:
- Show that Eng Review is missing or has open issues
- RECOMMENDATION: Choose C if the change is obviously trivial (< 20 lines, typo fix, config-only); Choose B for larger changes
- Options: A) Ship anyway B) Abort — run /plan-eng-review first C) Change is too small to need eng review
- Options: A) Ship anyway B) Abort — run /review or /plan-eng-review first C) Change is too small to need eng review
- If CEO Review is missing, mention as informational ("CEO Review not run — recommended for product changes") but do NOT block
- For Design Review: run `source <(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-diff-scope <base> 2>/dev/null)`. If `SCOPE_FRONTEND=true` and no design review (plan-design-review or design-review-lite) exists in the dashboard, mention: "Design Review not run — this PR changes frontend code. The lite design check will run automatically in Step 3.5, but consider running /design-review for a full visual audit post-implementation." Still never block.
ship/SKILL.md.tmpl
+1 -1
View File
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ If the Eng Review is NOT "CLEAR":
2. **If no override exists,** use AskUserQuestion:
- Show that Eng Review is missing or has open issues
- RECOMMENDATION: Choose C if the change is obviously trivial (< 20 lines, typo fix, config-only); Choose B for larger changes
- Options: A) Ship anyway B) Abort — run /plan-eng-review first C) Change is too small to need eng review
- Options: A) Ship anyway B) Abort — run /review or /plan-eng-review first C) Change is too small to need eng review
- If CEO Review is missing, mention as informational ("CEO Review not run — recommended for product changes") but do NOT block
- For Design Review: run `source <(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-diff-scope <base> 2>/dev/null)`. If `SCOPE_FRONTEND=true` and no design review (plan-design-review or design-review-lite) exists in the dashboard, mention: "Design Review not run — this PR changes frontend code. The lite design check will run automatically in Step 3.5, but consider running /design-review for a full visual audit post-implementation." Still never block.