fix(scheduler): require independent exact-head approval - #1270
fix(scheduler): require independent exact-head approval#1270seonghobae wants to merge 7 commits into
Conversation
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughPR Review Merge Scheduler가 현재 HEAD의 독립 승인과 GitHub aggregate 승인을 병합 조건으로 적용합니다. Coverage 전용 차단 해소 후 최신 증거와 실행 이력을 확인하고 OpenCode 리뷰를 재디스패치합니다. Changes병합 승인 정책
Estimated code review effort: 4 (Complex) | ~60 minutes Merge Risk: 🟡 Moderate · up to The scheduler can continue blocking an otherwise eligible pull request because an older failed coverage check is not ignored after a newer replacement succeeds. This concrete merge-gating defect should be fixed before merge. Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Scheduler
participant GitHubAPI
participant CoverageEvidence
participant OpenCodeWorkflow
Scheduler->>GitHubAPI: 현재 HEAD 승인 및 최신 CheckRun 조회
GitHubAPI-->>Scheduler: reviewDecision, reviews, check runs
Scheduler->>CoverageEvidence: 최신 coverage-evidence 및 Strix 상태 확인
CoverageEvidence-->>Scheduler: 완료 상태와 실패 검사
Scheduler->>OpenCodeWorkflow: 조건 충족 시 현재 HEAD 리뷰 재디스패치
OpenCodeWorkflow-->>GitHubAPI: OpenCode CheckRun 생성
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
@opencode-agent Please review the exact current head |
![devin-ai-integration[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/811515?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@opencode-agent Please review exact head |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@opencode-agent review Review exact current head 6cb7144 against protected main@0c6b9a6459c9dbdf5e23fb01df7a32a8a14964b3. Walk through the scheduler approval, exact-head binding, stale-review handling, and failure evidence; publish a substantive Reviews API verdict on this SHA. |
|
Exact-head local verification for 6cb7144: full pytest passed (1410 passed, 1 skipped, 16 subtests); coverage.py statement and branch coverage both 100% across scripts/ci; interrogate public docstring gate passed for scripts/ci/pr_review_merge_scheduler.py; compileall and git diff --check passed. No source change was needed after review. Hosted Checks and an independent exact-head approval remain required. |
|
@opencode-agent review Exact head: 6cb7144. Review the complete changed diff and report substantive findings with file/line evidence. |
|
Current exact-head Strix RCA: the required Strix run reached the scan gate, emitted zero vulnerabilities, but produced no authoritative report artifact. The log records NVIDIA NIM provider exhaustion/rate limiting followed by the configured openai-direct fallback returning HTTP 404. This is typed provider/backend infrastructure failure and fail-closed behavior, not a source finding. Next action: rerun the same-head Strix evidence after provider availability is restored; do not merge until the exact-head security evidence is complete. |
Exact-head review follow-up\n\nCurrent exact head: 6cb7144\n\nThe Strix provider rerun is now executing for this head after the earlier provider/backend failure. Please review the full scheduler diff and publish a substantive exact-head verdict only after the current required Checks complete. No predecessor success or review evidence is being reused. |
Exact-head verification receipt
No source, workflow, ruleset, protected-branch, or bypass mutation was used. |
|
Exact-head changed by the remote stack maintainer; predecessor evidence is discarded. Current exact head: #1266 was merged into this branch through the normal PR path, so the combined scheduler tree requires a fresh full review and hosted verification. @opencode-agent please inspect the complete current diff, exact-head dispatch-history retry floor, central active-run boundary, and the merged coverage-retry behavior, then publish a substantive Reviews API verdict tied only to this SHA. Do not reuse predecessor reviews or checks. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Exact current-head remediation on c55eb40: fixed failed_status_checks so a newer successful coverage-evidence run supersedes an older failed run in both normal merge and coverage-only retry paths. Reused one UTC-aware datetime.min fallback in latest_check_runs. Focused scheduler suite: 146 passed; git diff --check passed. The branch remains protected with no current formal approval. Please issue a fresh independent substantive review and required checks for this exact head; predecessor evidence is not reused. No bypass or gate weakening was used. |
|
Correction: exact current-head remediation on c55eb40. Fixed failed_status_checks so a newer successful coverage-evidence run supersedes an older failed run in both normal merge and coverage-only retry paths. Reused one UTC-aware datetime.min fallback in latest_check_runs. Focused scheduler suite: 146 passed; git diff --check passed. The branch remains protected with no current formal approval. Please issue a fresh independent substantive review and required checks for this exact head; predecessor evidence is not reused. No bypass or gate weakening was used. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Exact-head local verification completed for c55eb40: full pytest 1429 passed, 1 skipped, 16 subtests; coverage branch and statement 100 percent across scripts/ci (8499 statements, 3300 branches); interrogate docstring coverage 100 percent; Ruff lint passed; compileall and git diff --check passed. Ruff format check still reports pre-existing formatting drift in the two full files, so no unrelated reformat was introduced. Hosted required checks and independent approval remain pending; normal merge only. |
|
Exact-head follow-up on 8423ff1: fixed the valid central coverage authority gap. When SCHEDULER_REQUIRED_WORKFLOW_REPOSITORY is set, metadata-only Required OpenCode Review coverage-evidence no longer supersedes a failed OpenCode Review Dispatch run; retry and failed-check decisions use authoritative dispatch evidence while ordinary same-workflow reruns still supersede older failures. Added regression coverage and changelog entry. Verification: full pytest 1430 passed, 1 skipped, 16 subtests; statement and branch coverage 100 percent across scripts/ci (8504 statements, 3302 branches); interrogate docstring coverage 100 percent; Ruff lint, compileall, and git diff --check passed. The branch remains protected with no independent current-head approval. Please issue a fresh substantive review and required hosted checks for this exact head; no bypass or gate weakening was used. |
|
Disposition for the two exact-head review threads on 8423ff1: the cross-workflow coverage finding was valid and is fixed by excluding the central Required OpenCode Review metadata placeholder from authoritative coverage superseding; the new regression proves a newer placeholder success cannot mask failed OpenCode Review Dispatch evidence. The independent-approval observation is intentionally fail-closed: GitHub App and bot identities are not independent human approval under this scheduler policy. Both findings are now dispositioned; no source uncertainty remains from these threads. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Please perform a substantive review of the exact current head |
* fix: retry reviews after coverage blockers clear * fix(scheduler): match coverage blocker review body * test(scheduler): cover coverage evidence gate branches * test(scheduler): reproduce coverage retry self-block * fix(scheduler): unblock coverage-only review retry * fix(scheduler): preserve central coverage retry * test(scheduler): cover status-only coverage retry * fix(scheduler): prefer newest coverage rerun * fix(scheduler): keep coverage retries fail closed * fix(scheduler): ignore superseded coverage failures * fix(scheduler): bind coverage retries to one check snapshot * fix(scheduler): avoid duplicate coverage review dispatch * fix(scheduler): rate-limit same-head coverage retries * fix(scheduler): wait for active coverage re-review * fix(scheduler): disable auto-merge during coverage retry floor * fix(scheduler): bound coverage retry dispatches
2e8e503 to
ad01b4e
Compare
|
Exact-head rebase complete.
Please run a new independent substantive review against this exact head before merge. |
|
Exact-head local verification for ad01b4e (base 613a33e):
This evidence is bound only to the exact current head; predecessor reviews/checks were not reused. Required hosted Checks are still QUEUED and no current independent approval is present, so this PR remains blocked on the normal protected merge path. |
|
@opencode-agent review Please publish an independent substantive formal Reviews API verdict for exact current head |
![opencode-agent[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1549082?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed.
Findings
1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval
- Problem: Failed same-head checks remain for
ad01b4e69eae8a149560bc39e60bb693ab9028eb. - Root cause: The model-unavailable evidence fallback is allowed only when peer GitHub Checks are complete and clean.
- Fix: Read and fix the failed check logs below, then rerun the current-head checks.
- Regression test: Keep the model-unavailable fallback gated on an empty failed-check rollup.
Failed checks:
- Strix Security Scan/strix: FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/32713904601/job/97391004284)
- Strix Security Scan/strix: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/32713904601/job/97391004284)
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file: CHANGELOG.md"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: CHANGELOG.md"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: scheduler-independent-current-head-approval.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: scheduler-independent-current-head-approval.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
Evidence --> S3["CI script: pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S3 --> I3["review and security gate shell path"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: CI script: pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
R3 --> V3["bash -n plus Strix self-test"]
Evidence --> S4["Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S4 --> I4["regression suite"]
I4 --> R4["Review risk: Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
R4 --> V4["targeted test run"]
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed. Findings1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval
Failed checks:
Changed-File Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file: CHANGELOG.md"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: CHANGELOG.md"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: scheduler-independent-current-head-approval.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: scheduler-independent-current-head-approval.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
Evidence --> S3["CI script: pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S3 --> I3["review and security gate shell path"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: CI script: pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
R3 --> V3["bash -n plus Strix self-test"]
Evidence --> S4["Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S4 --> I4["regression suite"]
I4 --> R4["Review risk: Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
R4 --> V4["targeted test run"]
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed.
Findings
1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval
- Problem: Failed same-head checks remain for
ad01b4e69eae8a149560bc39e60bb693ab9028eb. - Root cause: The model-unavailable evidence fallback is allowed only when peer GitHub Checks are complete and clean.
- Fix: Read and fix the failed check logs below, then rerun the current-head checks.
- Regression test: Keep the model-unavailable fallback gated on an empty failed-check rollup.
Failed checks:
- Strix Security Scan/strix: FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/32713904601/job/97391004284)
- Strix Security Scan/strix: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/32713904601/job/97391004284)
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file: CHANGELOG.md"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: CHANGELOG.md"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: scheduler-independent-current-head-approval.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: scheduler-independent-current-head-approval.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
Evidence --> S3["CI script: pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S3 --> I3["review and security gate shell path"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: CI script: pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
R3 --> V3["bash -n plus Strix self-test"]
Evidence --> S4["Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S4 --> I4["regression suite"]
I4 --> R4["Review risk: Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
R4 --> V4["targeted test run"]
1 participant
Customer outcome
The organization merge scheduler refuses direct merge and auto-merge until
GitHub reports
reviewDecision: APPROVEDand a non-author, non-OpenCode formalapproval is bound to the exact live head. If stale authorization left
auto-merge armed, the scheduler disables it.
Root cause and minimal repair
PR #828 identified a real separation-of-duties gap but its old-base
implementation replayed stale files and split the mature scheduler into a
second core. This clean protected-main replacement reuses the existing
scheduler and adds only the shared authorization boundary, exact PR author
evidence, regressions, changelog, and APA 7 doctoring.
The independent-review helper considers only each eligible reviewer's latest
exact-head approval-affecting state. A later same-head change request or
dismissal therefore revokes that reviewer's earlier approval. Generic
github-actions[bot], missing identities, self-review, comment-only review,and predecessor-head approval remain fail closed. GitHub remains authoritative
for last-pusher, CODEOWNERS, required-review, and ruleset policy.
Exact current-head evidence
ad01b4e69eae8a149560bc39e60bb693ab9028ebmain@613a33e0cb1c6db9790fae99f6253445712ac37a97391010023, checked out the exact head, passed 1,440 tests with 1 skip and 16 subtests, and recordedtest_strix_quick_gate: PASS.32713907748and Exact Artifact SBOM Attestation run32713907676also checked out the exact head and passed.Merge boundary
Do not transfer review or check evidence from #828 or the predecessor head.
This exact head requires fresh hosted checks, zero unresolved current-head
threads, and independent exact-head approval before protected merge. Project #1
remains
In Progressuntil that lifecycle completes.Summary by CodeRabbit
병합 안정성 개선
검사 및 커버리지 처리 개선