๐งช [ํ ์คํธ ๊ฐ์ ] parse_external_head_update_reason ํจ์ ํ ์คํธ ์ถ๊ฐ#127
๐งช [ํ
์คํธ ๊ฐ์ ] parse_external_head_update_reason ํจ์ ํ
์คํธ ์ถ๊ฐ#127seonghobae wants to merge 14 commits into
Conversation
|
๐ Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a ๐ emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
![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 mergeability evidence and changed-file flow before approval, then found merge conflicts on the affected path.
Findings
1. HIGH Merge Conflict Guidance - Resolve the PR branch against the latest base branch
- Problem: GitHub reports mergeStateStatus
DIRTYfor this pull request. - Root cause: Branch
test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004cannot be merged cleanly intomain; the changed-file flow below shows which review/runtime path is blocked by the conflict. - Fix: Merge or rebase the latest
mainintotest-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004, resolve conflict markers in the PR branch, rerun the focused checks, and push the same branch. - Repair commands:
gh pr checkout 127 --repo ContextualWisdomLab/.github
git fetch origin main
git merge --no-ff origin/main # or: git rebase origin/main
git status --short
# resolve files, then git add <resolved-files>
# merge path: git commit
# rebase path: git rebase --continue
git push origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004
# rebase path only: git push --force-with-lease origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004- Regression test: Keep OpenCode approval gated on mergeability so model-output failures cannot approve a conflicted PR.
Change Flow DAG
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S1 --> I1["regression suite"]
I1 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V1["targeted test run"]
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: mergeStateStatus is
DIRTY; mergeable isCONFLICTING. - Head SHA:
33d6d604c250aa87ce71438dff4c392495470c4c - Workflow run: 28358989823
- Workflow attempt: 1
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode reviewed the current-head mergeability evidence and changed-file flow before approval, then found merge conflicts on the affected path. Findings1. HIGH Merge Conflict Guidance - Resolve the PR branch against the latest base branch
gh pr checkout 127 --repo ContextualWisdomLab/.github
git fetch origin main
git merge --no-ff origin/main # or: git rebase origin/main
git status --short
# resolve files, then git add <resolved-files>
# merge path: git commit
# rebase path: git rebase --continue
git push origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004
# rebase path only: git push --force-with-lease origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004
Merge Conflict Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V2["targeted test run"]
Changed-File Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V2["targeted test run"]
Merge Conflict Guidance
gh pr checkout 127 --repo ContextualWisdomLab/.github
git fetch origin main
git merge --no-ff origin/main # or: git rebase origin/main
git status --short
# resolve files, then git add <resolved-files>
# merge path: git commit
# rebase path: git rebase --continue
git push origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004
# rebase path only: git push --force-with-lease origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004 |
|
@copilot resolve the merge conflicts in this pull request |
โฆreason-7167455868434156004' into test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004
๋จธ์ง ์ถฉ๋ ํด๊ฒฐ ์๋ฃํ์ต๋๋ค. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR improves test coverage for parse_external_head_update_reason in scripts/ci/pr_review_merge_scheduler.py by adding missing test cases to the existing scheduler test suite.
Changes:
- Adds a new test covering successful extraction of external head repo identifiers from update guidance strings.
- Adds negative tests for non-matching input and the โempty repo nameโ edge case.
๐ก Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
@copilot ํจ์ฌ ๋ง์ ์๊ฐ์ ๋ค์ฌ์ ํจ์ฌ ๋ง์ ์ฌ์๋์ exponential sleep์ ์ถ๊ฐํด์๋ผ๋ ๋ฐ๋์ ์ฑ๊ณต์์ผ๋ผ. |
โฆability - OPENCODE_MODEL_ATTEMPTS: 1 โ 5 (more attempts per model) - OPENCODE_RUN_TIMEOUT_SECONDS: 240 โ 300 (5 min per attempt) - OPENCODE_TOTAL_RETRY_BUDGET_SECONDS: 360 โ 3600 (6 min โ 1 hour) - OPENCODE_BACKOFF_INITIAL_SECONDS: 30 โ 60 (longer initial wait) - OPENCODE_BACKOFF_MAX_SECONDS: 30 โ 600 (real exponential growth up to 10 min) - timeout-minutes: 20 โ 70 (accommodate the larger retry budget)"
์ด์ ์๋ |
@copilot ํฐ ๋ ํฌ์งํฐ๋ฆฌ๋ ๋ค์ฏ ์๊ฐ๋ ๊ฑธ๋ฆฌ๋๋ผ. |
|
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.
Review outcome
1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence
-
Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was
failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head. -
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
-
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports
successwith required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence. -
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking
needs.coverage-evidence.result == successbefore posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present. -
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
-
Reason: coverage-evidence result was
failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current headfe42f98dc238ad363efcd274bd538a4fa960d5bd. -
Head SHA:
fe42f98dc238ad363efcd274bd538a4fa960d5bd -
Workflow run: 28518708879
-
Workflow attempt: 2
Coverage evidence
Coverage Evidence
- Head SHA:
fe42f98dc238ad363efcd274bd538a4fa960d5bd - Required test evidence: supported repository test suites must pass.
- Required docstring evidence: repository-owned docstring gates must pass when configured; otherwise docstring coverage is advisory.
Python project dependencies (.)
Using CPython 3.12.3 interpreter at: /usr/bin/python3
Creating virtual environment at: .venv
Resolved 17 packages in 118ms
Downloading pygments (1.2MiB)
Downloaded pygments
Prepared 13 packages in 111ms
Installed 13 packages in 11ms
+ attrs==26.1.0
+ click==8.4.2
+ colorama==0.4.6
+ coverage==7.14.3
+ iniconfig==2.3.0
+ interrogate==1.7.0
+ packaging==26.2
+ pluggy==1.6.0
+ py==1.11.0
+ pygments==2.20.0
+ pytest==9.1.1
+ pytest-cov==7.1.0
+ tabulate==0.10.0
- Result: PASS
Python coverage with missing-line report (.)
============================= test session starts ==============================
platform linux -- Python 3.12.3, pytest-9.1.1, pluggy-1.6.0
rootdir: /home/runner/work/.github/.github/pr-head
configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: cov-7.1.0
collected 160 items
tests/test_assert_opencode_reasoning_effort.py ....... [ 4%]
tests/test_noema_review_gate.py .......... [ 10%]
tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py ...F....... [ 17%]
tests/test_opencode_review_normalize_output.py ......................... [ 33%]
[ 33%]
tests/test_opencode_workflow_shell_syntax.py . [ 33%]
tests/test_pr_governance_audit_contract.py .. [ 35%]
tests/test_pr_review_fix_scheduler.py ................... [ 46%]
tests/test_pr_review_fix_scheduler_coverage.py .. [ 48%]
tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py ................................ [ 68%]
.............................. [ 86%]
tests/test_render_opencode_prompt_template.py .... [ 89%]
tests/test_review_execution_contracts.py .. [ 90%]
tests/test_sandboxed_verify.py ......... [ 96%]
tests/test_sandboxed_web_e2e.py ...... [100%]
=================================== FAILURES ===================================
___________ test_workflow_provisions_sandbox_tool_and_reviewer_agent ___________
def test_workflow_provisions_sandbox_tool_and_reviewer_agent():
"""Guard the runtime OpenCode workspace, not only repo-local config."""
workflow = Path(".github/workflows/opencode-review.yml").read_text(
encoding="utf-8"
)
assert "code-reviewer-prompt.md" in workflow
assert "sandboxed_verify.py" in workflow
assert "sandboxed_web_e2e.py" in workflow
assert "review_execution_contracts.py" in workflow
assert "SANDBOXED_VERIFY_RESULT" in workflow
assert "SANDBOXED_WEB_E2E_RESULT" in workflow
assert "Docker Compose, devcontainer, Nix, or temporary package-install sandbox" in workflow
assert "scientific, statistical, simulation" in workflow
assert "skewed true" in workflow
assert "object naming" in workflow
assert "connected code paths, rendering paths" in workflow
assert "CHECK_LOOKUP_GH_TOKEN" in workflow
assert "retrying with workflow github token" in workflow
assert 'review_write_token="$GH_TOKEN"' in workflow
assert 'review_write_token="$OPENCODE_APP_TOKEN"' in workflow
assert 'review_write_token="$CHECK_LOOKUP_GH_TOKEN"' in workflow
assert 'review_write_token="${OPENCODE_APP_TOKEN:-$GH_TOKEN}"' not in workflow
assert "Review execution contracts" in workflow
assert "Accessibility/i18n:" in workflow
assert "Supply-chain/license:" in workflow
assert "Packaging:" in workflow
assert 'gsub("`"; "\'")' not in workflow
assert 'gsub("`"; "'")' in workflow
assert '"code-reviewer"' in workflow
assert workflow.count('"reasoningEffort": "high"') >= 10
assert '"task": "allow"' in workflow
assert 'cat >"$prompt_file" <<EOF' not in workflow
assert 'cat >"$prompt_file" <<\'EOF\'' not in workflow
assert "Run OpenCode PR Review model pool" in workflow
assert "opencode_review_model_pool" in workflow
assert "run_opencode_review_model_pool.sh" in workflow
assert "OPENCODE_MODEL_CANDIDATES" in workflow
model_pool_runner = Path("scripts/ci/run_opencode_review_model_pool.sh").read_text(encoding="utf-8")
assert "assert_reasoning_effort_for_candidate" in model_pool_runner
assert "assert_opencode_reasoning_effort.py" in model_pool_runner
assert "--config opencode.jsonc" in model_pool_runner
reasoning_effort_guard = Path("scripts/ci/assert_opencode_reasoning_effort.py").read_text(encoding="utf-8")
assert 'options.reasoningEffort=high' in reasoning_effort_guard
assert 'variants.high.reasoningEffort=high' in reasoning_effort_guard
assert "deepseek/deepseek-r1" in reasoning_effort_guard
assert "--config \"$OPENCODE_REVIEW_WORKDIR/opencode.jsonc\"" in workflow
assert 'timeout --kill-after=15s "${export_timeout_seconds}s" opencode export' in model_pool_runner
assert "session export did not complete within %ss" in model_pool_runner
assert "Read and follow the complete review contract" in model_pool_runner
assert "compact launcher as a reduced review policy" in model_pool_runner
assert "is_context_overflow_failure" in model_pool_runner
assert "tokens_limit_reached" in model_pool_runner
assert "skipping remaining attempts for this model" in model_pool_runner
assert "approve_low_risk_review_fallback_after_model_exhaustion" not in workflow
assert "changed_file_is_low_risk_review_fallback" not in workflow
assert "production source ๋๋ package manifest ๋ณ๊ฒฝ์ด ์์ต๋๋ค" not in workflow
assert "request_changes_for_coverage_evidence_failure" in workflow
assert '"## Review outcome"' in workflow
assert '"## Check outcome"' not in workflow
assert "publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states" in workflow
assert 'timeout-minutes: 75' in workflow
> assert re.search(r"Run OpenCode PR Review model pool[\s\S]{0,240}timeout-minutes: 20", workflow)
E assert None
E + where None = <function search at 0x7f87b5490220>('Run OpenCode PR Review model pool[\\s\\S]{0,240}timeout-minutes: 20', 'name: Required OpenCode Review\n\non:\n pull_request_target:\n types: [opened, synchronize, reopened, ready_for_r... The scheduled and PR-event scheduler paths remain authoritative.\\n\' "$GH_REPOSITORY" "$base_branch"\n fi\n')
E + where <function search at 0x7f87b5490220> = re.search
tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py:214: AssertionError
=============================== warnings summary ===============================
tests/test_assert_opencode_reasoning_effort.py::test_module_entrypoint_success
<frozen runpy>:128: RuntimeWarning: 'scripts.ci.assert_opencode_reasoning_effort' found in sys.modules after import of package 'scripts.ci', but prior to execution of 'scripts.ci.assert_opencode_reasoning_effort'; this may result in unpredictable behaviour
tests/test_render_opencode_prompt_template.py::test_module_entrypoint
<frozen runpy>:128: RuntimeWarning: 'scripts.ci.render_opencode_prompt_template' found in sys.modules after import of package 'scripts.ci', but prior to execution of 'scripts.ci.render_opencode_prompt_template'; this may result in unpredictable behaviour
tests/test_review_execution_contracts.py::test_discovers_package_managers_java_r_json_and_main
<frozen runpy>:128: RuntimeWarning: 'scripts.ci.review_execution_contracts' found in sys.modules after import of package 'scripts.ci', but prior to execution of 'scripts.ci.review_execution_contracts'; this may result in unpredictable behaviour
tests/test_sandboxed_verify.py::test_module_main_entrypoint
<frozen runpy>:128: RuntimeWarning: 'scripts.ci.sandboxed_verify' found in sys.modules after import of package 'scripts.ci', but prior to execution of 'scripts.ci.sandboxed_verify'; this may result in unpredictable behaviour
tests/test_sandboxed_web_e2e.py::test_module_import_and_main_entrypoint
<frozen runpy>:128: RuntimeWarning: 'scripts.ci.sandboxed_web_e2e' found in sys.modules after import of package 'scripts.ci', but prior to execution of 'scripts.ci.sandboxed_web_e2e'; this may result in unpredictable behaviour
-- Docs: https://docs.pytest.org/en/stable/how-to/capture-warnings.html
=========================== short test summary info ============================
FAILED tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py::test_workflow_provisions_sandbox_tool_and_reviewer_agent - assert None
+ where None = <function search at 0x7f87b5490220>('Run OpenCode PR Review model pool[\\s\\S]{0,240}timeout-minutes: 20', 'name: Required OpenCode Review\n\non:\n pull_request_target:\n types: [opened, synchronize, reopened, ready_for_r... The scheduled and PR-event scheduler paths remain authoritative.\\n\' "$GH_REPOSITORY" "$base_branch"\n fi\n')
+ where <function search at 0x7f87b5490220> = re.search
================== 1 failed, 159 passed, 5 warnings in 5.62s ===================
- Result: FAIL (exit 1)
Python docstring coverage advisory
RESULT: PASSED (minimum: 100.0%, actual: 100.0%)
- Result: PASS
Coverage Decision
- Result: FAIL
- Test evidence: not proven passing
- Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
- Failure count: 1
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test: test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py"]
R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
@copilot ํด๊ฒฐํฉ์๋ค. |
์์ฒญํ์ ๋๋ก ํจ์ฌ ๋ ๋ง์ ์๊ฐ์ ํ ์ ํ์ฌ OpenCode ๋ฆฌ๋ทฐ ๊ณผ์ ์์ ์ฌ์๋ ํ์์ ๋๊ธฐ ์๊ฐ์ ํ๊ธฐ์ ์ผ๋ก ๋๋ ธ์ต๋๋ค. ๊ด๋ จ๋ ์ํฌํ๋ก์ฐ ์ค์ ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode exhausted the configured model pool without a usable current-head review conclusion. This is not approval evidence, so the PR is blocked until a source-backed review can establish approval sufficiency or identify concrete fixes.
Findings
1. HIGH review evidence:1 - OpenCode could not establish approval sufficiency
- Problem: every configured model path failed to produce a usable current-head control block.
- Root cause: model execution, timeout, export, normalization, or approval-gate validation did not complete after exponential retry across the configured model pool.
- Impact: approving from deterministic check state alone would miss PR-intent mismatches, missing files, edge-case bugs, robustness gaps, UX/DX regressions, security issues, and CodeGraph-backed base/head flow changes.
- Fix: rerun OpenCode after model availability recovers, or update the PR with the missing files, tests, docs, generated artifacts, and verification evidence needed for a source-backed review conclusion.
- Regression test: keep the approval gate posting REQUEST_CHANGES, not APPROVE or check-only failure, when no model produces a valid current-head review.
Summary
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: coverage-evidence passed and peer GitHub Checks completed without failures, but no model produced a valid review control block.
- Deterministic evidence checked but not used for approval: current-head changed-file evidence (.github/workflows/opencode-review.yml, tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py, tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py); coverage-evidence result success; peer checks from statusCheckRollup excluding this OpenCode check.
- Model outcome: model_pool=exhausted; selected_model=none.
- Head SHA:
da6a01b0d7e144d2d04ef6cf4eadacaf4abc7f52 - Workflow run: 28520852336
- Workflow attempt: 1
No PR approval was posted because model-output failure is not evidence that the PR has no blockers.
Inline comment note: OpenCode could not find an added RIGHT-side diff line for this PR, so the model-exhaustion blocker is attached to the PR review body instead of a file line.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (2 files)"]
R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode exhausted the configured model pool without a usable current-head review conclusion. This is not approval evidence, so the PR is blocked until a source-backed review can establish approval sufficiency or identify concrete fixes.
Findings
1. HIGH review evidence:1 - OpenCode could not establish approval sufficiency
- Problem: every configured model path failed to produce a usable current-head control block.
- Root cause: model execution, timeout, export, normalization, or approval-gate validation did not complete after exponential retry across the configured model pool.
- Impact: approving from deterministic check state alone would miss PR-intent mismatches, missing files, edge-case bugs, robustness gaps, UX/DX regressions, security issues, and CodeGraph-backed base/head flow changes.
- Fix: rerun OpenCode after model availability recovers, or update the PR with the missing files, tests, docs, generated artifacts, and verification evidence needed for a source-backed review conclusion.
- Regression test: keep the approval gate posting REQUEST_CHANGES, not APPROVE or check-only failure, when no model produces a valid current-head review.
Summary
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: coverage-evidence passed and peer GitHub Checks completed without failures, but no model produced a valid review control block.
- Deterministic evidence checked but not used for approval: current-head changed-file evidence (.github/workflows/opencode-review.yml, tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py, tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py); coverage-evidence result success; peer checks from statusCheckRollup excluding this OpenCode check.
- Model outcome: model_pool=exhausted; selected_model=none.
- Head SHA:
da6a01b0d7e144d2d04ef6cf4eadacaf4abc7f52 - Workflow run: 28520852336
- Workflow attempt: 2
No PR approval was posted because model-output failure is not evidence that the PR has no blockers.
Inline comment note: OpenCode could not find an added RIGHT-side diff line for this PR, so the model-exhaustion blocker is attached to the PR review body instead of a file line.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (2 files)"]
R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode exhausted the configured model pool without a usable current-head review conclusion. This is not approval evidence, so the PR is blocked until a source-backed review can establish approval sufficiency or identify concrete fixes.
Findings
1. HIGH review evidence:1 - OpenCode could not establish approval sufficiency
- Problem: every configured model path failed to produce a usable current-head control block.
- Root cause: model execution, timeout, export, normalization, or approval-gate validation did not complete after exponential retry across the configured model pool.
- Impact: approving from deterministic check state alone would miss PR-intent mismatches, missing files, edge-case bugs, robustness gaps, UX/DX regressions, security issues, and CodeGraph-backed base/head flow changes.
- Fix: rerun OpenCode after model availability recovers, or update the PR with the missing files, tests, docs, generated artifacts, and verification evidence needed for a source-backed review conclusion.
- Regression test: keep the approval gate posting REQUEST_CHANGES, not APPROVE or check-only failure, when no model produces a valid current-head review.
Summary
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: coverage-evidence passed and peer GitHub Checks completed without failures, but no model produced a valid review control block.
- Deterministic evidence checked but not used for approval: current-head changed-file evidence (.github/workflows/opencode-review.yml, tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py, tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py); coverage-evidence result success; peer checks from statusCheckRollup excluding this OpenCode check.
- Model outcome: model_pool=exhausted; selected_model=none.
- Head SHA:
da6a01b0d7e144d2d04ef6cf4eadacaf4abc7f52 - Workflow run: 28520852336
- Workflow attempt: 3
No PR approval was posted because model-output failure is not evidence that the PR has no blockers.
Inline comment note: OpenCode could not find an added RIGHT-side diff line for this PR, so the model-exhaustion blocker is attached to the PR review body instead of a file line.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (2 files)"]
R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode exhausted the configured model pool without a usable current-head review conclusion. This is not approval evidence, so the PR is blocked until a source-backed review can establish approval sufficiency or identify concrete fixes.
Findings
1. HIGH review evidence:1 - OpenCode could not establish approval sufficiency
- Problem: every configured model path failed to produce a usable current-head control block.
- Root cause: model execution, timeout, export, normalization, or approval-gate validation did not complete after exponential retry across the configured model pool.
- Impact: approving from deterministic check state alone would miss PR-intent mismatches, missing files, edge-case bugs, robustness gaps, UX/DX regressions, security issues, and CodeGraph-backed base/head flow changes.
- Fix: rerun OpenCode after model availability recovers, or update the PR with the missing files, tests, docs, generated artifacts, and verification evidence needed for a source-backed review conclusion.
- Regression test: keep the approval gate posting REQUEST_CHANGES, not APPROVE or check-only failure, when no model produces a valid current-head review.
Summary
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: coverage-evidence passed and peer GitHub Checks completed without failures, but no model produced a valid review control block.
- Deterministic evidence checked but not used for approval: current-head changed-file evidence (.github/workflows/opencode-review.yml, tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py, tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py); coverage-evidence result success; peer checks from statusCheckRollup excluding this OpenCode check.
- Model outcome: model_pool=exhausted; selected_model=none.
- Head SHA:
da6a01b0d7e144d2d04ef6cf4eadacaf4abc7f52 - Workflow run: 28520852336
- Workflow attempt: 4
No PR approval was posted because model-output failure is not evidence that the PR has no blockers.
Inline comment note: OpenCode could not find an added RIGHT-side diff line for this PR, so the model-exhaustion blocker is attached to the PR review body instead of a file line.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (2 files)"]
R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode exhausted the configured model pool without a usable current-head review conclusion. This is not approval evidence, so the PR is blocked until a source-backed review can establish approval sufficiency or identify concrete fixes.
Findings
1. HIGH review evidence:1 - OpenCode could not establish approval sufficiency
- Problem: every configured model path failed to produce a usable current-head control block.
- Root cause: model execution, timeout, export, normalization, or approval-gate validation did not complete after exponential retry across the configured model pool.
- Impact: approving from deterministic check state alone would miss PR-intent mismatches, missing files, edge-case bugs, robustness gaps, UX/DX regressions, security issues, and CodeGraph-backed base/head flow changes.
- Fix: rerun OpenCode after model availability recovers, or update the PR with the missing files, tests, docs, generated artifacts, and verification evidence needed for a source-backed review conclusion.
- Regression test: keep the approval gate posting REQUEST_CHANGES, not APPROVE or check-only failure, when no model produces a valid current-head review.
Summary
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: coverage-evidence passed and peer GitHub Checks completed without failures, but no model produced a valid review control block.
- Deterministic evidence checked but not used for approval: current-head changed-file evidence (.github/workflows/opencode-review.yml, tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py, tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py); coverage-evidence result success; peer checks from statusCheckRollup excluding this OpenCode check.
- Model outcome: model_pool=exhausted; selected_model=none.
- Head SHA:
d9a5810d941243906399c51a1576d84c1fab06b2 - Workflow run: 28550746369
- Workflow attempt: 3
No PR approval was posted because model-output failure is not evidence that the PR has no blockers.
Inline comment note: OpenCode could not find an added RIGHT-side diff line for this PR, so the model-exhaustion blocker is attached to the PR review body instead of a file line.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (2 files)"]
R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode exhausted the configured model pool without a usable current-head review conclusion. This is not approval evidence, so the PR is blocked until a source-backed review can establish approval sufficiency or identify concrete fixes.
Findings
1. HIGH review evidence:1 - OpenCode could not establish approval sufficiency
- Problem: every configured model path failed to produce a usable current-head control block.
- Root cause: model execution, timeout, export, normalization, or approval-gate validation did not complete after exponential retry across the configured model pool.
- Impact: approving from deterministic check state alone would miss PR-intent mismatches, missing files, edge-case bugs, robustness gaps, UX/DX regressions, security issues, and CodeGraph-backed base/head flow changes.
- Fix: rerun OpenCode after model availability recovers, or update the PR with the missing files, tests, docs, generated artifacts, and verification evidence needed for a source-backed review conclusion.
- Regression test: keep the approval gate posting REQUEST_CHANGES, not APPROVE or check-only failure, when no model produces a valid current-head review.
Summary
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: coverage-evidence passed and peer GitHub Checks completed without failures, but no model produced a valid review control block.
- Deterministic evidence checked but not used for approval: current-head changed-file evidence (.github/workflows/opencode-review.yml, tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py, tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py); coverage-evidence result success; peer checks from statusCheckRollup excluding this OpenCode check.
- Model outcome: model_pool=exhausted; selected_model=none.
- Head SHA:
61804825100041b3623f12ee092618e08f035cb7 - Workflow run: 28557598164
- Workflow attempt: 2
No PR approval was posted because model-output failure is not evidence that the PR has no blockers.
Inline comment note: OpenCode could not find an added RIGHT-side diff line for this PR, so the model-exhaustion blocker is attached to the PR review body instead of a file line.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (2 files)"]
R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode reviewed the current-head mergeability evidence and changed-file flow before approval, then found merge conflicts on the affected path.
Findings
1. HIGH Merge Conflict Guidance - Resolve the PR branch against the latest base branch
- Problem: GitHub reports mergeStateStatus
DIRTYfor this pull request. - Root cause: Branch
test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004cannot be merged cleanly intomain; the changed-file flow below shows which review/runtime path is blocked by the conflict. - Fix: Merge or rebase the latest
mainintotest-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004, resolve conflict markers in the PR branch, rerun the focused checks, and push the same branch. - Repair commands:
gh pr checkout 127 --repo ContextualWisdomLab/.github
git fetch origin main
git merge --no-ff origin/main # or: git rebase origin/main
git status --short
# resolve files, then git add <resolved-files>
# merge path: git commit
# rebase path: git rebase --continue
git push origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004
# rebase path only: git push --force-with-lease origin HEAD:test-parse-external-head-update-reason-7167455868434156004- Regression test: Keep OpenCode approval gated on mergeability so model-output failures cannot approve a conflicted PR.
Merge Conflict Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V2["targeted test run"]
- Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
- Reason: mergeStateStatus is
DIRTY; mergeable isCONFLICTING. - Head SHA:
68f1ec9675628c86055ab28140fdf4789a8de805 - Workflow run: 28564578660
- Workflow attempt: 1
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Test (2 files)"]
S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
I2 --> Conflict["Merge conflict blocks this path"]
Conflict --> V2["targeted test run"]
|
Closing during org-wide PR backlog reduction. This looks like a low-priority automated maintenance PR ( |
Understood. Acknowledging that this work is now obsolete and stopping work on this task. |
๐ฏ What:
scripts/ci/pr_review_merge_scheduler.pyํ์ผ์parse_external_head_update_reasonํจ์์ ๋ํ ํ ์คํธ ๋๋ฝ ๋ถ๋ถ ๊ฐ์ .๐ Coverage: ์ฑ๊ณต์ ์ธ ์ถ์ถ, ์๋ชป๋ ์ ๋ ฅ (๋งค์นญ ์๋จ), ๋น ๋ ํฌ์งํ ๋ฆฌ ์ด๋ฆ์ด ์ฃผ์ด์ง๋ ์ฃ์ง ์ผ์ด์ค๋ค์ ํ ์คํธ ์ปค๋ฒ.
โจ Result: ํด๋น ํจ์๋ ์ด์ 100% ํ ์คํธ ์ปค๋ฒ๋ฆฌ์ง๋ฅผ ๊ฐ์ง.
PR created automatically by Jules for task 7167455868434156004 started by @seonghobae