Require canonical post-merge validation wording and baseline proof for non-zero test-suite exits #529

New Issue

2026-07-08T04:04:21-05:00

jcwalker3 commented

2026-07-08 04:04:21 -05:00

Problem:
Recent PR review reports can say “approved” or “passed” even when the PR was already merged by a concurrent session or when the full suite exited non-zero due to a claimed pre-existing failure. This creates ambiguous durable state and weakens controller confidence.

Required behavior:

If a PR is already merged/closed before review submission, the system must guide the reviewer to post “post-merge validation” instead of a normal active approval.
If the full suite exits non-zero, the report must not call it a clean pass.
A claimed pre-existing/baseline failure must include proof from master or a documented known-failure source.
Canonical comments must distinguish:
- clean validation pass
- validation pass with baseline-proven unrelated failure
- validation blocked by unresolved failure
- post-merge moot validation
PRs/issues must receive process-state labels that reflect this distinction.

Acceptance criteria:

Add tests for a merged PR receiving post-merge validation wording.
Add tests that a non-zero full-suite exit cannot be summarized as “passed” unless baseline proof is attached.
Add tests that baseline-failure labels/status metadata are required when accepting a non-clean suite result.
Add/update canonical comment templates for post-merge validation and baseline-failure proof.
Ensure controller closure is blocked when the report says “expected pre-existing failure” without proof.

Problem: Recent PR review reports can say “approved” or “passed” even when the PR was already merged by a concurrent session or when the full suite exited non-zero due to a claimed pre-existing failure. This creates ambiguous durable state and weakens controller confidence. Required behavior: 1. If a PR is already merged/closed before review submission, the system must guide the reviewer to post “post-merge validation” instead of a normal active approval. 2. If the full suite exits non-zero, the report must not call it a clean pass. 3. A claimed pre-existing/baseline failure must include proof from master or a documented known-failure source. 4. Canonical comments must distinguish: - clean validation pass - validation pass with baseline-proven unrelated failure - validation blocked by unresolved failure - post-merge moot validation 5. PRs/issues must receive process-state labels that reflect this distinction. Acceptance criteria: - Add tests for a merged PR receiving post-merge validation wording. - Add tests that a non-zero full-suite exit cannot be summarized as “passed” unless baseline proof is attached. - Add tests that baseline-failure labels/status metadata are required when accepting a non-clean suite result. - Add/update canonical comment templates for post-merge validation and baseline-failure proof. - Ensure controller closure is blocked when the report says “expected pre-existing failure” without proof.

jcwalker3 added the status:in-progress label 2026-07-09 14:00:36 -05:00

jcwalker3 commented

2026-07-09 14:00:36 -05:00

Issue claim heartbeat

kind: claim
issue: Require canonical post-merge validation wording and baseline proof for non-zero test-suite exits (#529)
branch: feat/issue-529-canonical-validation-wording
phase: claimed
profile: prgs-author
pr: none
blocker: none
next_action: create worktree and begin implementation

**Issue claim heartbeat** - kind: claim - issue: #529 - branch: feat/issue-529-canonical-validation-wording - phase: claimed - profile: prgs-author - pr: none - blocker: none - next_action: create worktree and begin implementation

jcwalker3 commented

2026-07-09 14:04:06 -05:00

Issue claim heartbeat

kind: claim
issue: Require canonical post-merge validation wording and baseline proof for non-zero test-suite exits (#529)
branch: feat/issue-529-canonical-validation-wording
phase: claimed
profile: prgs-author
pr: none
blocker: none
next_action: create worktree and begin implementation

**Issue claim heartbeat** - kind: claim - issue: #529 - branch: feat/issue-529-canonical-validation-wording - phase: claimed - profile: prgs-author - pr: none - blocker: none - next_action: create worktree and begin implementation

jcwalker3 referenced this issue from a commit

2026-07-09 14:40:12 -05:00

feat: block issue closure on unproven expected pre-existing failure (#529)

jcwalker3 referenced this issue from a commit

2026-07-09 14:50:59 -05:00

feat: post-merge moot validation wording + validation:* labels (#529)

jcwalker3 referenced a pull request that will close this issue

2026-07-09 14:52:08 -05:00

feat: canonical validation wording, baseline proof, and closure gate (Closes #529) #598

jcwalker3 added status:pr-open and removed status:in-progress labels 2026-07-09 14:52:09 -05:00

sysadmin referenced this issue

2026-07-09 17:17:43 -05:00