Scaled-Tech-Consulting/Gitea-Tools
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 73 Pull Requests 9 Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Reviewer reports must include exact conflict proof for skipped non-mergeable PRs #322

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-07-07 01:30:27 -05:00 by jcwalker3 · 1 comment
jcwalker3 commented 2026-07-07 01:30:27 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Reviewer workflows may skip earlier PRs because they are non-mergeable, but the final report does not always include the exact conflict proof.

Observed behavior:

A reviewer workflow skipped PR #282 and PR #284 because they were mergeable: false and described unresolved merge conflicts. The transcript included merge-tree diagnostics, but the final report did not include the exact conflict output or file-level proof.

Required behavior:

  1. When skipping a PR because it is non-mergeable, fetch live PR state.

  2. Report:

    • PR number
    • current head SHA
    • mergeability result
    • command/tool used to prove conflict
    • conflicting files, if available
    • whether the PR head changed since any prior blocker

  3. If conflict proof cannot be retrieved, classify the PR as MERGEABILITY_UNVERIFIED instead of skipping silently.

Acceptance criteria:

  • Non-mergeable skips include file-level or tool-level conflict proof.
  • Reports fail validation if they skip a non-mergeable PR without proof.
  • Tests cover mergeable PR, non-mergeable PR with files, non-mergeable PR without file details, stale head, and missing conflict proof.
Reviewer workflows may skip earlier PRs because they are non-mergeable, but the final report does not always include the exact conflict proof. Observed behavior: A reviewer workflow skipped PR #282 and PR #284 because they were `mergeable: false` and described unresolved merge conflicts. The transcript included merge-tree diagnostics, but the final report did not include the exact conflict output or file-level proof. Required behavior: 1. When skipping a PR because it is non-mergeable, fetch live PR state. 2. Report: * PR number * current head SHA * mergeability result * command/tool used to prove conflict * conflicting files, if available * whether the PR head changed since any prior blocker 3. If conflict proof cannot be retrieved, classify the PR as `MERGEABILITY_UNVERIFIED` instead of skipping silently. Acceptance criteria: * Non-mergeable skips include file-level or tool-level conflict proof. * Reports fail validation if they skip a non-mergeable PR without proof. * Tests cover mergeable PR, non-mergeable PR with files, non-mergeable PR without file details, stale head, and missing conflict proof.
jcwalker3 added the status:in-progress label 2026-07-07 04:08:19 -05:00
jcwalker3 commented 2026-07-07 04:09:04 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

PR opened with non-mergeable skip conflict-proof verifier.

  • Entry point: assess_non_mergeable_skip_proof(report_text, skipped_prs=[...])
  • Blocks silent skips; requires conflict proof or MERGEABILITY_UNVERIFIED

Verification: pytest tests/test_reviewer_mergeability_skip.py tests/test_review_proofs.py -q — 159 passed

PR opened with non-mergeable skip conflict-proof verifier. - Entry point: `assess_non_mergeable_skip_proof(report_text, skipped_prs=[...])` - Blocks silent skips; requires conflict proof or `MERGEABILITY_UNVERIFIED` Verification: `pytest tests/test_reviewer_mergeability_skip.py tests/test_review_proofs.py -q` — 159 passed
sysadmin removed the status:in-progress label 2026-07-07 04:17:11 -05:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
allocator
Controller-owned work allocator
 anti-stomp
Prevent concurrent LLM session stomping
 architecture
Architecture / structural design
 bug
chore
codex
OpenAI Codex client / workflow session surface
 concurrency
Concurrent session safety
 contamination
Workflow or session contamination incident
 control-plane
MCP control-plane coordination and allocation authority
 dashboard
MCP operational dashboard/queue view
 database
Internal coordination storage (SQLite/Postgres)
 design
Design / investigation, no implementation
 documentation
Docs / runbooks
 enhancement
New feature or improvement
 gitea
Gitea MCP workflow
 glitchtip
GlitchTip integration
 important
incident
Operational or process incident requiring durable audit trail
 incident-bridge
Sentry-to-Gitea incident bridging
 integration
Integration testing
 jenkins
Jenkins integration
 labels
Label taxonomy management
 leases
Lease adopt/release/expire lifecycle
 mcp
MCP server / tooling
 mcp-health
MCP namespace and runtime health
 mcp-menu
MCP menu surface
 multi-project
Work spanning multiple monitoring projects or Gitea repos
 mutating
Mutating action; requires gating
 nice-to-have
observability
Observability, metrics, traces, error reporting
 portability
Cross-platform / portability
 preflight
Shared preflight gates before mutation
 protected-branch
Protected branch / stable-branch policy concern
 queue
Work queue visibility and allocation
 read-only
Read-only, no mutation
 reconnect
MCP client reconnect/reload recovery path
 recovery
Recovery paths for stale/foreign leases
 refactor
Code refactor / restructure
 release
Release / versioning
 reliability
Reliability / failure handling
 resumable-review
Persist and resume prepared review verdicts across sessions
 reviewer
Reviewer workflow tooling
 roadmap
Roadmap / umbrella issue
 safety
Safety rails and fail-closed mutation guards
 security
Security / trust boundary
 self-hosted
Self-hosted infrastructure integration
 sentry
Sentry error monitoring integration
 stale-runtime
Stale backend daemon / runtime-vs-master parity failures
 status:blocked
Issue is blocked
 status:in-progress
Issue is being worked on
 status:pr-open
Issue has an open pull request
 status:ready
Issue is ready for work
 terminal-lock
Terminal review lock (#332) path
 testing
Tests / test coverage
 tracker
Issue tracker hygiene / meta
 type:bug
Bug or defect
 type:feature
Feature or enhancement
 type:feature
Feature or enhancement
 type:guardrail
Safety gate or guardrail
 visibility
Workflow state visibility for LLMs/operators
 workflow
Cross-tool workflow
 workflow-hardening
LLM workflow coordination hardening
 workflow-hardening
LLM workflow coordination hardening
No labels
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No projects
Assignees
Clear assignees
jcwalker3 sysadmin
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: Scaled-Tech-Consulting/Gitea-Tools#322