housebroken-cli 0.2.4__tar.gz → 0.2.6__tar.gz

{housebroken_cli-0.2.4 → housebroken_cli-0.2.6}/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.5
 Name: housebroken-cli
-Version: 0.2.4
+Version: 0.2.6
 Summary: Agent-written pull requests that do not make a mess in someone else's house.
 Project-URL: Repository, https://github.com/lenamonj/housebroken
 License-Expression: MIT

{housebroken_cli-0.2.4 → housebroken_cli-0.2.6}/pyproject.toml

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ build-backend = "hatchling.build"
 
 [project]
 name = "housebroken-cli"
-version = "0.2.4"
+version = "0.2.6"
 description = "Agent-written pull requests that do not make a mess in someone else's house."
 dynamic = ["readme"]
 license = "MIT"

{housebroken_cli-0.2.4 → housebroken_cli-0.2.6}/scripts/inbox.sh

@@ -120,6 +120,14 @@ if [ "$do_ci" -eq 1 ]; then
   echo "== census of open pull requests: failing, blocked, conflicting, changes requested, draft =="
   prs="$(gh search prs --author "$user" --state open --limit 100 --json repository,number,isDraft --jq '.[] | "\(.repository.nameWithOwner) \(.number) \(.isDraft)"' 2>/dev/null)"
   total=$(printf '%s\n' "$prs" | grep -c . || true)
+  # GitHub search returns a short page when it is throttled, and a census of half
+  # the pull requests reads exactly like a clean one. Compare against the count the
+  # API itself reports and say so loudly rather than silently flagging fewer.
+  claimed="$(gh api "search/issues?q=is:pr+author:$user+is:open&per_page=1" --jq '.total_count' 2>/dev/null)"
+  case "$claimed" in
+    ''|*[!0-9]*) echo "CENSUS UNVERIFIED: could not read the open pull request count from the API" ;;
+    *) [ "$claimed" -eq "$total" ] || echo "CENSUS INCOMPLETE: search returned $total of $claimed open pull requests, so this census covers only part of them; re-run when the search rate limit recovers" ;;
+  esac
   flagged=0
   while read -r repo num draft; do
     [ -n "$repo" ] || continue

{housebroken_cli-0.2.4 → housebroken_cli-0.2.6}/skills/housebroken/SKILL.md

@@ -55,11 +55,18 @@ report it in one line and do not proceed to the next step.
    exists.
 
 3. **Is it a fix or an opinion?**
-   A change that rejects an input the project tolerated, or changes a
-   default, is a breaking change on a stable major, however wrong the old
-   behavior looks. It becomes an issue that describes the behavior and offers
-   the patch, never a pull request. Classify every patch before writing a
-   test for it. A finding whose only red evidence is a measurement, such
+   A change that rejects an input the project tolerated, changes a default,
+   or narrows what the project publishes is the maintainer's call, not
+   yours, however wrong the old behavior looks. Send the pull request
+   anyway, and put the call in the body: one paragraph naming exactly what
+   breaks for existing users, and a sentence offering to narrow it or close
+   it if they would rather not. Never send that change silently, and never
+   sit on it. Two exceptions take the issue route instead: a policy that
+   says behavior changes need discussion first, and a runtime behavior
+   change on a stable major that the project's own compatibility promise
+   forbids. Even then the patch is pushed to a branch and linked from the
+   issue, so the work is attributable to whoever did it. Classify every
+   patch before writing a test for it. A finding whose only red evidence is a measurement, such
    as peak memory or elapsed time, is a hold: a pull request needs a test
    that fails on the default branch for a wrong value, a crash or an
    out-of-bounds access, and "less memory" is not that test.