@feigi/fleet-ctl 3.76.7 → 3.76.8
This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
|
@@ -53,7 +53,23 @@ tree — so an exit 2 naming a moved or unreadable audited tree is a halt
|
|
|
53
53
|
like every other, not a spelling for you to correct.
|
|
54
54
|
|
|
55
55
|
**Confirm every deferral — and every claimed APPLY — has a home that outlives
|
|
56
|
-
the merge.**
|
|
56
|
+
the merge.** A deferral of a finding in the review's result is not yours to
|
|
57
|
+
re-judge when the PR's latest review counted a survived or unverified finding:
|
|
58
|
+
`ledger.mjs dispatch` then dispatched you only once the PR's ledger row held a
|
|
59
|
+
`dispositions-ok` verdict from `dispositions-check.mjs` on that review
|
|
60
|
+
(`dispositionsRefusal`), and that check had already read back where the
|
|
61
|
+
fix-applier's disposition record says each deferral was filed. That verdict is
|
|
62
|
+
the judgement of those homes: do not halt on a home the script accepted, and
|
|
63
|
+
do not re-file one as an open issue. One such home is the PR's own
|
|
64
|
+
`PR #<M> review: the suggestion band, checked` issue, which counts although it
|
|
65
|
+
is closed and labelled `wontfix`. Where the latest review counted no survived
|
|
66
|
+
and no unverified finding, dispatch required no verdict; that record is still
|
|
67
|
+
a home there when it matches the script's own definition — `homeHolds` in
|
|
68
|
+
`dispositions-check.mjs`: state `CLOSED`, labelled `wontfix`, titled exactly
|
|
69
|
+
`recordTitle(<M>)` — and any other closed issue is not. Everything else — a
|
|
70
|
+
claimed APPLY, a deferral the review's result does not carry, and a deferral
|
|
71
|
+
no verdict judged — you judge by hand, by the test below. The test is a
|
|
72
|
+
durable home, not a tracker number: a tracker
|
|
57
73
|
issue and a committed in-tree comment both qualify, and for a finding whose
|
|
58
74
|
remedy was measured worse than the defect the in-tree note is the better one.
|
|
59
75
|
What fails is a promise living only in a PR body, or on the PR's *own* source
|
package/package.json
CHANGED
|
@@ -18,7 +18,23 @@ What does not empty it is noticing the question and dispatching anyway.
|
|
|
18
18
|
## Duty 2: every deferral, and every claimed APPLY, has a home that outlives the merge
|
|
19
19
|
|
|
20
20
|
**Confirm every deferral — and every claimed APPLY — has a home that outlives
|
|
21
|
-
the merge.**
|
|
21
|
+
the merge.** A deferral of a finding in the review's result is not yours to
|
|
22
|
+
re-judge when the PR's latest review counted a survived or unverified finding:
|
|
23
|
+
`ledger.mjs dispatch` then dispatched you only once the PR's ledger row held a
|
|
24
|
+
`dispositions-ok` verdict from `dispositions-check.mjs` on that review
|
|
25
|
+
(`dispositionsRefusal`), and that check had already read back where the
|
|
26
|
+
fix-applier's disposition record says each deferral was filed. That verdict is
|
|
27
|
+
the judgement of those homes: do not halt on a home the script accepted, and
|
|
28
|
+
do not re-file one as an open issue. One such home is the PR's own
|
|
29
|
+
`PR #<M> review: the suggestion band, checked` issue, which counts although it
|
|
30
|
+
is closed and labelled `wontfix`. Where the latest review counted no survived
|
|
31
|
+
and no unverified finding, dispatch required no verdict; that record is still
|
|
32
|
+
a home there when it matches the script's own definition — `homeHolds` in
|
|
33
|
+
`dispositions-check.mjs`: state `CLOSED`, labelled `wontfix`, titled exactly
|
|
34
|
+
`recordTitle(<M>)` — and any other closed issue is not. Everything else — a
|
|
35
|
+
claimed APPLY, a deferral the review's result does not carry, and a deferral
|
|
36
|
+
no verdict judged — you judge by hand, by the test below. The test is a
|
|
37
|
+
durable home, not a tracker number: a tracker
|
|
22
38
|
issue and a committed in-tree comment both qualify, and for a finding whose
|
|
23
39
|
remedy was measured worse than the defect the in-tree note is the better one.
|
|
24
40
|
What fails is a promise living only in a PR body, or on the PR's *own* source
|