docs: clarify dispute status taxonomy in DISPUTE_SYSTEM.md - #41
Merged
Conversation
- Add Status taxonomy distinguishing four status layers: order public (kind 38383), order internal/DMs, dispute protocol (kind 38386), and v1 local UX - Add protocol-to-UX mapping table showing resolved/closed are app-only labels - Clarify Dispute.status is a free-form string overwritten by OrderState.updateWith(), not a protocol enum - Split status normalization into order status mapping vs local UX dispute status mapping - Clarify Status.dispute is a real protocol order status sent via DMs but never published in kind 38383 - Expand resolution paths to show protocol and v1 app effects separately
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
WalkthroughUpdated DISPUTE_SYSTEM.md: added a "Status taxonomy" (four dispute-related status layers), clarified that Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In @.specify/v1-reference/DISPUTE_SYSTEM.md:
- Line 233: The section heading "Cross references" should use a hyphen for
consistency — change the heading text to "Cross-references" in the
DISPUTE_SYSTEM.md file by locating the header line that currently reads "## 9)
Cross references" and updating it to "## 9) Cross-references" so the term
matches other hyphenated headings.
- Line 66: The Dispute.status taxonomy is inconsistent about whether "initiated"
is a client-only UX value; update the doc so both places agree: either add
"initiated" to the local-UX status list in the table for Dispute.status
(alongside in-progress, resolved, seller-refunded, closed) and keep the
explanatory note that these are never sent to Mostro and that resolved/closed
are not protocol values, or remove "initiated" from the UI gating sentence and
explicitly state it is a protocol-only status; make the corresponding change
wherever OrderState.updateWith() and the local-status gating sentence reference
"initiated" so the two descriptions match.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 5e6127f3-07a0-4c6b-a154-2f3a88168d28
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.specify/v1-reference/DISPUTE_SYSTEM.md
| | **Order status (public)** | Kind 38383 event, tag `s` | **Does not change** when a dispute opens. Updates to `success` (admin-settle) or `canceled` (admin-cancel) only at resolution. | The public order book never shows `dispute`. | | ||
| | **Order status (internal + DMs)** | Mostrod database + gift-wrapped DMs to users | Changes to `dispute` when a dispute is opened (`setup_dispute()` in mostro-core). Then to `success` or `canceled` at resolution. | This is a real protocol order status — mostrod checks `Status::Dispute` before allowing admin-settle or admin-cancel. It reaches clients via gift wraps but is never published in kind 38383 events. | | ||
| | **Dispute status (protocol)** | Kind 38386 event, tag `s` | `initiated` → `in-progress` → `settled` \| `seller-refunded` | Authoritative source: `mostro-core::dispute::Status` enum. | | ||
| | **Local UX dispute status (v1 app)** | `Dispute.status` string field set by `OrderState.updateWith()` | `in-progress`, `resolved`, `seller-refunded`, `closed` | **Never sent to Mostro.** Client-side labels for UI rendering. `resolved` and `closed` do not exist in the protocol. | |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Clarify whether initiated is a local UX status or protocol-only.
There’s a docs inconsistency: Line 66 defines local UX Dispute.status as in-progress/resolved/seller-refunded/closed, but Line 145 lists initiated as another local status that can appear in UI gating. Please either include initiated in the taxonomy as a transient local value or remove it from the local-status gating sentence.
Also applies to: 145-145
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In @.specify/v1-reference/DISPUTE_SYSTEM.md at line 66, The Dispute.status
taxonomy is inconsistent about whether "initiated" is a client-only UX value;
update the doc so both places agree: either add "initiated" to the local-UX
status list in the table for Dispute.status (alongside in-progress, resolved,
seller-refunded, closed) and keep the explanatory note that these are never sent
to Mostro and that resolved/closed are not protocol values, or remove
"initiated" from the UI gating sentence and explicitly state it is a
protocol-only status; make the corresponding change wherever
OrderState.updateWith() and the local-status gating sentence reference
"initiated" so the two descriptions match.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary by CodeRabbit