ruleset pin 문서 갱신 - #96
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Updates the organization required-workflow rollout documentation to reflect the latest re-pin of ruleset 18156473 to a new .github@main commit SHA after merging PRs #94 and #95, and records the new OpenCode “false fact approval” blocking contract as rollout evidence/risk.
Changes:
- Updates the documented required-workflow SHA to
531482764986bf7da98c1317d59e6e51e7c61d02and refreshes the “Updated” timestamp. - Adds rollout evidence entries referencing
.githubPRs#94and#95. - Adds a new risk note stating that OpenCode approval summaries must not contradict exact changed-file evidence.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues. FindingsNo blocking findings. SummaryReview summary: No actionable changes or blockers found in the PR. Verification posture: Linter/static: Not applicable (no source files changed). TDD/regression: Not applicable (no test files changed). Coverage: Not applicable (no source files changed). Docstring coverage: Not applicable (no source files changed). DAG: Not applicable (no execution path changes). PoC/execution: Not applicable (no executable changes). DDD/domain: Not applicable (no domain changes). CDD/context: Not applicable (no context changes). Similar issues: Not applicable (no comparable changes). Claim/concept check: Not applicable (no conceptual changes). Standards search: Not applicable (no standards-related changes). Compatibility/convention: Not applicable (no compatibility changes). Breaking-change/backcompat: Not applicable (no breaking changes). Performance: Not applicable (no performance-related changes). Developer experience: Helps maintainers (no changes). User experience: No impact (no user-facing changes). Security/privacy: Not applicable (no security changes). Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including docs/org-required-workflow-rollout.md.
Change Flow DAGflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Docs: org-required-workflow-rollout.md"]
S1 --> I1["operator or user guidance"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Docs: org-required-workflow-rollout.md"]
R1 --> V1["docs review"]
|
![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 reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues.
Findings
No blocking findings.
Summary
Review summary: No actionable changes or blockers found in the PR. Verification posture: Linter/static: Not applicable (no source files changed). TDD/regression: Not applicable (no test files changed). Coverage: Not applicable (no source files changed). Docstring coverage: Not applicable (no source files changed). DAG: Not applicable (no execution path changes). PoC/execution: Not applicable (no executable changes). DDD/domain: Not applicable (no domain changes). CDD/context: Not applicable (no context changes). Similar issues: Not applicable (no comparable changes). Claim/concept check: Not applicable (no conceptual changes). Standards search: Not applicable (no standards-related changes). Compatibility/convention: Not applicable (no compatibility changes). Breaking-change/backcompat: Not applicable (no breaking changes). Performance: Not applicable (no performance-related changes). Developer experience: Helps maintainers (no changes). User experience: No impact (no user-facing changes). Security/privacy: Not applicable (no security changes).
Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including docs/org-required-workflow-rollout.md.
Linter/static: workflow/static review evidence is bounded by the current-head GitHub Checks gate and changed-file evidence.
TDD/regression: coverage execution evidence and focused changed hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Coverage: coverage execution evidence proves 100% test coverage.
Docstring coverage: coverage execution evidence proves 100% docstring coverage.
DAG: Change Flow DAG maps docs/org-required-workflow-rollout.md through bounded evidence, review risk, and required checks.
PoC/execution: coverage-evidence job executed on the current head and reported PASS.
DDD/domain: workflow and repository-governance invariants were reviewed against changed files in bounded evidence.
CDD/context: CodeGraph evidence, changed-file history, and focused hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Similar issues: changed-file history evidence was reviewed for comparable local precedents.
Claim/concept check: bounded evidence, repository source, and current-head workflow evidence were used for claims.
Standards search: standards and external-source checks are delegated to configured OpenCode web_search/Context7/DeepWiki sources when applicable; no evidence-backed standards blocker is present in bounded evidence.
Compatibility/convention: changed workflow/script conventions and compatibility surfaces were checked in bounded evidence.
Breaking-change/backcompat: deployment evidence and changed-file history were checked for backward-compatibility risk.
Performance: changed surfaces were checked for performance risk in bounded evidence.
Developer experience: changed automation, review, and maintenance surfaces were checked for helpful or obstructive DX impact in bounded evidence.
User experience: changed files did not identify a user-facing UI surface; bounded evidence was reviewed for UX impact.
Security/privacy: workflow-token, review-gate, and repository-automation security/privacy boundaries were checked in bounded evidence.
- Result: APPROVE
- Reason: No blockers found in the PR changes.
- Head SHA:
60aa44638a7d1b54255ef50899f87aab8c9c0258 - Workflow run: 28320314322
- Workflow attempt: 1
* fix(coverage): keep native fuzz locks out of generic images Rebuild the focused exact-name Atheris lock boundary directly on the fully checked OpenCode diagnostics and Strix hardening prerequisite, preserving only the materializer, realistic regression, APA 7 doctoring, plan, specification, and changelog delta. * fix(coverage): preserve exact failure diagnostics Apply the native-fuzz exact-name classifier on top of the current shared failure-summary materializer instead of replacing it with an older implementation, and make the permanent diagnostics workflow execute and compile the new realistic regression. * docs(coverage): align the integration plan with surviving PRs Remove the closed #76 rebase step, name #759 and #96 as the surviving ordered prerequisites, preserve shared failure diagnostics in the implementation task, and include the permanent diagnostics workflow in the reviewed commit scope.
요약
18156473을 새.github@mainSHA531482764986bf7da98c1317d59e6e51e7c61d02로 재고정한 사실을 rollout 문서에 반영합니다.검증
git diff --check531482764986bf7da98c1317d59e6e51e7c61d02로 고정됨