-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
review: bugfix-PR regression-coverage checklist, Phase 1 (#93) #105
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -184,6 +184,7 @@ def _knowledge_root() -> Path: | |
| # unassisted baseline caught and Direct missed, and neither belongs to any component | ||
| # owner, so no knowledge route will surface them. | ||
| "When the diff adds or changes a test, check the assertions bind to real behavior and not to values the fixture, mock, or fake injected.", | ||
| "When the PR is a bugfix (title, labels, or linked issue), require a regression test that pins the original failure path; happy-path-only additions do not count, and a missing pin becomes an explicit blocking or non-blocking finding, never silence.", | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The new Direct item asks the host to condition on labels or linked issues, but the Direct contract only tells callers to collect and pass Useful? React with 👍 / 👎. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This Direct item stops after requiring a test for the original failure and a finding when that test is absent. Unlike the Strict addition, it never asks reviewers to inspect same-class entrypoints and boundaries or to record the reason and residual risk for accepted gaps. A narrowly targeted regression test can therefore satisfy Direct while identical failure paths remain uncovered, so Direct does not carry the claimed coverage-completeness duty. Useful? React with 👍 / 👎. |
||
| "When the diff passes a new argument to a dependency, check it against the lowest version the project's own constraints still permit, not the version installed here.", | ||
| "For resource or cache changes, trace budget measurement through reservation and physical consumption, including warmup/profile/activation ordering and low-resource behavior.", | ||
| "For runtime changes, trace exception propagation, partial-allocation cleanup, cancellation, timeout, shutdown, and concurrent scheduling to the terminal user-visible signal.", | ||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This persists a new executable review-experience mandate in a
guides/page, even though the repository contract requires PR-learning and review-experience intake to produce executable rules in the nearest owner'srules.md. Keeping the demand/check/conclude requirement here bypasses owner-scoped rule routing; merge it into the appropriate owner rule and update the checklist injection/index without duplicating the conclusion.AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L12-L17
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.