Repository navigation
Conversation
|
@codex review Please perform the official formal review of current head |
Codex Review Summary: ✅ CompletedThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 3d4ae5ca52
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".
| if (bound && ack?.status === "found" && ack.kind === kind && ack.subject_id === parts.subject_id | ||
| && ack.material_sha256 === material && (ack.review_sha256 ?? null) === review | ||
| && DECISION_ACTIONS[item.category]?.includes(ack.action) && digest(ack.receipt_sha256) | ||
| && instant(ack.acknowledged_at) && /^actor-[0-9a-f]{16}$/.test(ack.actor_alias || "")) status = "acknowledged"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For legacy promotion material rows without a stored review binding, both review and ack.review_sha256 are null, so this comparison accepts a validated v1 receipt as acknowledged. This is a supported persisted state exercised by the staged-rollout fixtures in tests/human_decisions_worker_validation.mjs; readTodoDecisionCompletion also permits it because its authority comparison accepts null/null. However, v1 receipts bind only the legacy material fields and cannot establish the full promotion review digest required by the new completion contract. Require a valid promotion review digest before projecting an ACK, and preserve unknown for unqualified historical receipts rather than treating missing bindings as an exact match.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggeredSecurity review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
|
@codex review Please perform one fresh official formal review of current head This bounded repair addresses official P2 finding 4537340202: promotion Central publication checker publication-check/2.0-advisory (83d9d1130377): Keep this PR Draft. No merge, label, deployment, protected operation or broader |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Another round soon, please! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggeredSecurity review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
Summary
The decision inbox already records decisions and operations, but does not expose
assignment availability, blocker resume conditions, revision-bound setup links or
validated completion acknowledgements together. Add an additive read-only
todo_lifecycleprojection to the existing inbox and decision detail.Changes
Repair official P2 finding 4537340202: a promotion acknowledgement requires a
valid current review digest. Historical/v1 missing, malformed and null/null
review bindings remain unknown. A tests-first regression covers both promotion
categories and qualified receipts.
Reuse current durable decision authority and the existing receipt integrity
validator. Acknowledgement requires exact subject, material and review bindings.
Keep missing/invalid evidence unknown and incomplete inbox reads partial;
expose stable resume codes and pseudonymous acknowledgement actors only.
Preserve existing writes, eligibility and runtime readback. Add schema/docs and
fake-only tests including actual Worker list/detail and durable restart checks.
Testing
and pass after this change.
a shared dependency symlink with a lockfile-local install for the UX1 binary
identity test. No source/test safety assertion was relaxed.
regressions, frontend build and operations tests pass.
Python package build pass. Three unchanged conditional historical bundle
candidate checks are outside the workflow's applicable scope for this delta.
Risk and scope
Completion is explicitly scoped to decision intent recording. It does not
prove setup effectiveness, application/readback, delivery, reconciliation,
execution or broader M09 acceptance. Person assignment is not stored by existing
sources and remains
not_recorded; no person is invented. Credential maintenancehas no supported inbox completion writer. No new task storage or writer, frontend,
daily/digest change, deploy, protected switch, IAM, Secret or execution action.
The integration base is c2ec433. The seven-file
candidate is current PR head on feat/m09-todo-lifecycle. Merge is a later coordinator
step after the established review process; this PR stays Draft.
AI attribution
Implemented and self-reviewed with OpenAI Codex, gpt-6.1-sol, medium. Independent
current-head formal review is requested separately once; it is not pre-claimed.
Central publication checker
publication-check/2.0-advisory, build83d9d1130377, advisory: 4159 matching lines, 4162 findings in the full tracked candidate. Added lines: zero shared-mask/exact-authority matches. Existing baseline matches remain outside this bounded lifecycle change.First 20 matches (file:line and centrally masked text):