Skip to content

Start issues with in-progress and gate optional SDD before branching - #396

Merged
efraespada merged 9 commits into
developfrom
codex/issue-start-sdd-gate
Sep 17, 2026
Merged

efraespada merged 9 commits into
developfrom
codex/issue-start-sdd-gate

Conversation

@efraespada

@efraespada efraespada commented Sep 17, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

The branch adds an opt-in pre-branch SDD gate and makes issue start and branch readiness explicit, validated, and remotely verified. It also updates setup, documentation, specifications, generated artifacts, and tests to enforce the new workflow and trust boundaries.

What changed

  • Added issue-managed-branches and pre-branch-sdd configuration, replacing legacy branch-launcher settings and aligning generated setup/profile guidance.
  • Changed issue processing to require an explicit authorized start, route eligible work through SDD clarification and validation, and distinguish branch-required from branchless help flows.
  • Added catalog ownership and SDD validation, isolated drafting and allowlisted publication, first-commit path checks, exact linked-branch handling, and remote readiness reconciliation with fail-closed recovery states.
  • Documented the issue-start and pre-branch SDD lifecycle, updated the specification catalog and related user/operator guidance, and expanded automated coverage.

Review notes

  • Controlled GitHub UX verification and dogfooding remain outstanding; the repository specification explicitly places that evidence outside this local implementation task.

@docs-page

docs-page Bot commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To preview the documentation for this pull request, visit the following URL:

docs.page/vypdev/copilot~396

Documentation is deployed and generated using docs.page

@vypbot
vypbot self-requested a review September 17, 2026 06:32
@vypbot vypbot added this to vypdev Sep 17, 2026
@vypbot vypbot moved this to In Progress in vypdev Sep 17, 2026
@codecov-commenter

codecov-commenter commented Sep 17, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 85.32884% with 87 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 92.21%. Comparing base (55067b9) to head (4eb75d9).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...infrastructure/pre_branch_sdd_workspace_adapter.ts 81.65% 8 Missing and 23 partials ⚠️
...ation/usecases/sdd/pre_branch_sdd_gate_use_case.ts 88.65% 2 Missing and 14 partials ⚠️
src/domain/pre_branch_sdd.ts 82.97% 2 Missing and 14 partials ⚠️
src/application/usecases/issue_use_case.ts 58.82% 4 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...ication/policies/setup_configuration_validation.ts 60.00% 2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
src/application/usecases/issue_comment_use_case.ts 60.00% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
src/application/usecases/issue_workflow.ts 95.12% 0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...steps/issue/reconcile_branch_readiness_use_case.ts 93.33% 0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
src/utils/repository_agent_guidance.ts 66.66% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
src/actions/common_action.ts 50.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
... and 4 more
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #396      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    92.42%   92.21%   -0.21%     
===========================================
  Files          658      664       +6     
  Lines        18252    18797     +545     
  Branches      4760     4938     +178     
===========================================
+ Hits         16869    17334     +465     
- Misses         566      585      +19     
- Partials       817      878      +61     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/actions/configuration_builders.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/actions/github_action_execution.ts 87.50% <100.00%> (ø)
src/actions/github_action_label_inputs.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/actions/input_boolean_policy.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/actions/local_action_configuration_sections.ts 88.70% <100.00%> (ø)
src/actions/local_action_execution.ts 92.30% <ø> (ø)
src/actions/setup_execution_boundary.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/application/contracts/input_keys.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...pplication/policies/deployment_lifecycle_policy.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...tion/policies/initial_label_provisioning_policy.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 36 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@vypbot vypbot left a comment •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Current status: Overall coverage is partial; this snapshot does not prove that all of its findings are resolved.
Last reconciled on 4eb75d9. See aggregate Bugbot status.

🤖 Bugbot review snapshot

Bugbot reported 1 potential problem when commit c7a0661 was analyzed. This snapshot is historical; use the status block above for current state. 1 finding is linked to changed code.

Findings

  • medium: Do not mark issue working before branch readiness is verified — src/application/policies/lifecycle_state_policy.ts:83

Comment thread src/application/policies/lifecycle_state_policy.ts Outdated
@vypbot

vypbot commented Sep 17, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Bugbot: review incomplete

Current status: The review of 4eb75d9 has partial coverage and cannot declare the whole pull request clean.

Action: Do not treat this review as complete. Review the sources under Incomplete coverage and manually inspect omitted items; rerun only after reducing the relevant scope or restoring provider access.

Incomplete coverage
  • selection: complete; retained=1
  • pull-request-comments: complete; retained=2
  • review-threads: complete; retained=2
  • diff: partial; retained=35, omitted=101, truncated=9
  • previous-findings: complete; retained=0
  • human-conversation: complete; retained=0
  • rules: complete; retained=0

Pull request · Verified commit · Workflow run

…ycle

Cover SDD publication recovery, trust checks, and branch failure paths; align the issue-start specification with verified readiness.

@vypbot vypbot left a comment •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Current status: Overall coverage is partial; this snapshot does not prove that all of its findings are resolved.
Last reconciled on 4eb75d9. See aggregate Bugbot status.

🤖 Bugbot review snapshot

Bugbot reported 1 potential problem when commit 1e11837 was analyzed. This snapshot is historical; use the status block above for current state. 1 finding is linked to changed code.

Findings

  • medium: Issue start does not create the managed branch — src/application/usecases/issue_workflow.ts:148

Comment thread src/application/usecases/issue_workflow.ts Outdated
Make the start decision explicit through issue orchestration and defer branch cleanup and deployment until linked readiness is verified. Cover manual branched labels and unverified branches.
…boundaries

Exercise new capability validation, unsafe paths, missing catalog data, and unrelated remote commits in the SDD gate and workspace adapter.
@efraespada
efraespada merged commit 867f243 into develop Sep 17, 2026
8 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from In Progress to Done in vypdev Sep 17, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants