docs(v06): close out stages 8-10 — test, review, release prep for v0.8.1#511
docs(v06): close out stages 8-10 — test, review, release prep for v0.8.1#511Luis85 wants to merge 7 commits into
Conversation
Runs the Specorator spec workflow stages 8 (testing), 9 (review), and 10 (release prepare) against the version-0-6-plan, closing out the v0.6 productization work shipped incrementally since v0.6.0. Stage 8 (qa): test-plan.md and test-report.md covering REQ-V06-001 through REQ-V06-012. 10/12 pass; REQ-V06-010 deferred to PR-H, REQ-V06-011 partial (ISO watch-item section missing, FINDING-V06-001 S3). npm run verify: ok. T-V06-013 implementation-log entry backfilled (omitted when PR #181 landed). Stage 9 (reviewer): traceability.md built, review.md produced. Verdict: Approved with conditions (3 S3/S4 conditions, no S1/S2). All three conditions resolved in this commit or carried forward with named owners. Stage 10 (release-manager, prepare): release-notes.md targeting v0.8.1. CHANGELOG.md v0.8.1 entry added. workflow-state.md advanced to learning stage. PR-D scope-cut row corrected (T-V06-008/009 delivered in v0.6, not v0.7). No irreversible actions taken — tag/publish awaits authorisation. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: b94294cbbf
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
…-off log Hand-off notes for reviewer (Stage 9) and release-manager (Stage 10) were listed in reverse order. Swap them so the log reads chronologically.
|
@codex review Generated by Claude Code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: a2b3fae5d3
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
…-011 Remove the mutually inconsistent "PR #181 remains draft" clause while keeping the factual statement that pr-plan-g-iso-9001-watch.md landed on develop via commit dbf41c2. https://claude.ai/code/session_011TPNgd7jBv3ySSyvaTifA1
|
@codex review Generated by Claude Code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 79d169b1c8
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
- Correct current_stage back to release (not learning) — release is awaiting human authorization, so the stage must remain release per workflow rules - Set release-notes.md to in-progress to satisfy check:specs active-stage gate - Add "types":["node"] to tsconfig.scripts.json for TypeScript 6 compatibility https://claude.ai/code/session_011TPNgd7jBv3ySSyvaTifA1
|
@codex review Generated by Claude Code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d47350c45e
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review Generated by Claude Code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d47350c45e
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
…atus The hand-off note said 'release-notes.md marked complete' while the frontmatter kept release-notes.md: in-progress for the release-tag hold. Corrected the note to say 'in-progress (release-tag hold)'. https://claude.ai/code/session_011TPNgd7jBv3ySSyvaTifA1
|
@codex review Generated by Claude Code |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff. ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
|
@codex review Generated by Claude Code |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work! ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d8d4818ee5
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| ## Risks to test coverage | ||
|
|
||
| 1. **REQ-V06-010 deferred (S3):** T-V06-012 (public positioning) is not yet complete. TEST-V06-010 is recorded as a gap. The test plan documents the deferred status rather than treating it as coverage. | ||
| 2. **REQ-V06-011 partial (S3):** The ISO 9001:2026 watch item was delivered via commit `dbf41c2` (PR #181 plan file) but the PR remains draft/not formally merged. The `docs/quality-assurance-track.md` carries an FDIS reference on line 11 but lacks a dedicated watch-item section. Coverage is marginal — the review trigger is implicit rather than named. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Update this risk note so it does not say PR #181 is still draft when the same commit records dbf41c2 as already landed on develop (for example in implementation-log.md). This contradiction makes the REQ-V06-011 evidence chain ambiguous and can cause later reviewers to misclassify the gap as an unmerged-delivery issue instead of the actual missing watch-item-section issue.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: c14dbd3799
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
|
||
| - **Requirement:** Implementation log completeness (quality gate in implementation-log.md) | ||
| - **Severity:** S4 (cosmetic/traceability gap; does not affect feature function) | ||
| - **Observation:** Commit `dbf41c2` (PR #181) delivered T-V06-013 on `develop`, but `implementation-log.md` has no Stage 7 entry for T-V06-013. The deviations summary table does not list it, and the stage-7 entries jump from T-V06-009 (hooks) to T-V06-011 (adoption profiles). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This observation is now incorrect in the same commit: implementation-log.md includes a new Stage 7 entry for T-V06-013 and adds it to the deviations summary, so keeping FINDING-V06-003 as an open gap creates a false defect record and can mislead Stage 9/10 reviewers into tracking already-resolved work.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
3 participants
Summary
version-0-6-planworkflow Stages 8–10 for v0.8.1 consolidation patch preptest-plan.md+test-report.md— 10/12 REQs pass; REQ-V06-010 deferred (PR-H), REQ-V06-011 partial (ISO watch-item S3);npm run verifygreentraceability.md+review.md— Verdict: Approved with conditions (3 S3/S4, no S1/S2); all conditions resolved or trackedrelease-notes.mdtargeting v0.8.1,CHANGELOG.mdupdated;workflow-state.mdadvanced tolearning; PR-D scope-cut corrected; no tag/publish yetWhat changes
specs/version-0-6-plan/test-plan.md— newspecs/version-0-6-plan/test-report.md— newspecs/version-0-6-plan/traceability.md— newspecs/version-0-6-plan/review.md— newspecs/version-0-6-plan/release-notes.md— new (v0.8.1 target)specs/version-0-6-plan/implementation-log.md— T-V06-013 entry backfilledspecs/version-0-6-plan/workflow-state.md— advanced tolearning, PR-D corrected,implementation-log.mdmarked completeCHANGELOG.md— v0.8.1 entry addedNo irreversible actions
Tag, npm publish, and GitHub Release are not done here. Those require explicit human authorisation.
Test plan
npm run verify— green (119.4s)🤖 Generated with Claude Code