feat(data): add contributor reconciliation reports - #123
Merged
JSONbored merged 5 commits intoMay 30, 2026
Conversation
Compare official contributor totals with cached GitHub context and keep maintainer-lane history separated in private outcome data.
![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: e380346b7b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@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: 0cd041b312
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@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: c204f2a4b7
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
JSONbored
approved these changes
May 30, 2026
JSONbored
left a comment
JSONbored
left a comment
Owner
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@oktofeesh1 this is merge-ready from my pass.
- Deterministic: check rollup is green and merge-tree against current
origin/mainis clean. - Maintainer judgment: official-vs-cached contributor reconciliation is wired into outcome history, decision-pack paths, MCP/API schema, and maintainer-lane separation.
- Validation: tests cover official-authoritative data, GitHub-only context, cached-stat separation, and maintainer association from issues.
JSONbored
added
gittensor:feature
Merged
24 tasks
JSONbored
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2026
extractLinkedIssues populates the linkedIssues the MCP sends for eligibility, score preview, and gate prediction. Its regex matched the closing keywords without a word boundary, so a keyword embedded in a longer word captured the trailing number: `hotfix 5` -> [5], `prefixes 12` -> [12], `unclosed 9` -> [9]. Anchor the keyword alternatives with `\b`, matching the two canonical server-side extractors (src/db/repositories.ts and src/signals/engine.ts, which both use `\b(?:close[sd]?|fix(?:e[sd])?|resolve[sd]?)`). The bare `#` branch stays boundary-free so `#123` still matches anywhere. Adds a regression test for the embedded-keyword non-matches and the standalone-keyword matches. No issue because issue creation is restricted on this repo; this is a small, self-evident correctness fix in a pure helper with no schema or API change.
4 tasks
12 tasks
25 tasks
JSONbored
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 7, 2026
The linked-issue detector that populates the stored pr.linkedIssues field (what the actual gate-close disposition reads) only matched GitHub's bare `Closes #123` closing-keyword form, not the equally valid, fully-qualified `Closes owner/repo#123` form. A PR whose only closing reference used the qualified form was scored "missing linked issue" and closed under the linked-issue-required policy, even though it correctly referenced a real, open issue. A separate, already-correct implementation of the same qualified-form matching existed in signals/engine.ts (added for #1988), but was only used for pre-open preflight planning, not the post-open gate-evaluation path that actually decides to close a PR -- the two implementations had drifted apart. Consolidated to one: db/repositories.ts now owns the canonical extractLinkedIssueNumbers/extractLinkedIssueNumbersWithOverflow, extended to accept a repoFullName and match owner/repo#N only when owner/repo case-insensitively equals the PR's own repo (a reference to a different repo closes an issue there, not here). engine.ts's local duplicate is removed in favor of importing the canonical version.
JSONbored
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 7, 2026
…ax (#3880) * fix(signals): recognize the qualified owner/repo#N closing-issue syntax The linked-issue detector that populates the stored pr.linkedIssues field (what the actual gate-close disposition reads) only matched GitHub's bare `Closes #123` closing-keyword form, not the equally valid, fully-qualified `Closes owner/repo#123` form. A PR whose only closing reference used the qualified form was scored "missing linked issue" and closed under the linked-issue-required policy, even though it correctly referenced a real, open issue. A separate, already-correct implementation of the same qualified-form matching existed in signals/engine.ts (added for #1988), but was only used for pre-open preflight planning, not the post-open gate-evaluation path that actually decides to close a PR -- the two implementations had drifted apart. Consolidated to one: db/repositories.ts now owns the canonical extractLinkedIssueNumbers/extractLinkedIssueNumbersWithOverflow, extended to accept a repoFullName and match owner/repo#N only when owner/repo case-insensitively equals the PR's own repo (a reference to a different repo closes an issue there, not here). engine.ts's local duplicate is removed in favor of importing the canonical version. * test(github): cover the nullish body fallback in unlinkedPullRequests counting
This was referenced Jul 7, 2026
2 tasks
JSONbored
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 7, 2026
extractLinkedIssueNumbersWithOverflow scanned raw PR body text for "Closes #N"-style keywords with no regard for markdown code spans. This repo's own PR template checklist contains the literal example text "(e.g. `Closes #123`)", so every PR that keeps the unmodified checklist item spuriously linked to issue #123 -- exactly the kind of linked-issue misdetection this review stack needs to get right. GitHub's own native closing-keyword linker does not treat backtick-wrapped text as a real directive either, so stripping inline code spans before scanning also brings this closer to GitHub's actual behavior.
This was referenced Jul 7, 2026
fix(mcp): port #4039 linked-issue extractor parity to MCP + predicted-gate
RealDiligent/gittensory#4
Open
RealDiligent
added a commit
to RealDiligent/gittensory
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 7, 2026
Port inline code-span stripping and qualified owner/repo#N scoping from repositories.ts (JSONbored#4039/JSONbored#3862) into the MCP local-branch mirror and the predicted-gate engine so template checklist text does not spuriously link issue JSONbored#123 and branch-analysis gate predictions match server preflight. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
3 tasks
RealDiligent
added a commit
to RealDiligent/gittensory
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 7, 2026
Port inline code-span stripping and qualified owner/repo#N scoping from repositories.ts (JSONbored#4039/JSONbored#3862) into the MCP local-branch mirror and the predicted-gate engine so template checklist text does not spuriously link issue JSONbored#123 and branch-analysis gate predictions match server preflight. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
RealDiligent
added a commit
to RealDiligent/gittensory
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2026
Port inline code-span stripping and qualified owner/repo#N scoping from repositories.ts (JSONbored#4039/JSONbored#3862) into the MCP local-branch mirror and the predicted-gate engine so template checklist text does not spuriously link issue JSONbored#123 and branch-analysis gate predictions match server preflight. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
12 tasks
JSONbored
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 16, 2026
…dIssueNumbers (#6630) `predicted-gate-engine.ts`'s local `extractLinkedIssueNumbers` (used by `buildPreflightResult` for the miner's local predicted-gate preview) had no inline-code-span exclusion, unlike its canonical twin `extractLinkedIssueNumbersWithOverflow` in `src/db/repositories.ts`. Since this repo's own PR template contains the literal `` `Closes #123` `` example, a miner previewing an unfilled/lightly-edited template body would misread that backtick-wrapped boilerplate as a real linked-issue reference — silently suppressing a `missing_linked_issue` warning the live gate would still raise, and breaking predicted/live gate parity. Port the canonical exclusion: collect inline code-span ranges via `text.matchAll(/`[^`\n]*`/g)` and skip any closing-keyword match whose range overlaps a span, across all three match forms (bare `#N`, qualified `owner/repo#N`, full URL). The span text itself is not stripped — per the canonical comment, blanking spans would let text on either side combine into a fake closing reference. Scoped only to this file; the canonical extractor and `engine.ts` (which imports the canonical one) are untouched. Extends test/unit/predicted-gate-engine-coverage.test.ts: a backtick-wrapped `` `Closes #123` `` (and qualified/URL variants) resolves to no linked issues, while the same unwrapped `Closes #123` still returns [123]. Closes #6630
5 tasks
JSONbored
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 27, 2026
…mns; handle transfers; wake on legacy CI events (#9116) * fix(webhook): stop a stale payload reverting close-critical columns; handle transfers; wake on legacy CI events #9057 -- the out-of-order guard protected only state/headSha/mergedAt/ githubUpdatedAt/labels. Every OTHER column was written unconditionally from a possibly-stale payload, including the ones the linked-issue gate reads -- a hard blocker and a close reason. Real sequence: a contributor pushes (`synchronize`, T1), then edits the body to add "Fixes #123" (`edited`, T2). GitHub does not guarantee delivery order, and once heads diverge the two jobs have different coalesce keys, so `synchronize` can be dequeued LAST. The guard correctly preserved state/headSha/labels -- then reverted body and linkedIssuesJson to the pre-edit snapshot, and since `synchronize` is itself in PR_PUBLIC_SURFACE_ACTIONS the same pass re-ran the gate against the reverted body: a wrong autonomous close for "No linked issue detected" on a PR that has one. That close reason appears in the live ledger. body/linkedIssuesJson/linkedIssueClaimedAt now reuse the existing sparse-body preservation path (the incoming value is not current truth in either case), and title/baseRef/headRef/authorAssociation are protected on the same condition. Applied to the onConflictDoUpdate SET clause as well as the INSERT values -- the UPDATE is the path that actually runs for an existing row -- and to the returned record, which callers act on in-process. #9056 -- `repository.transferred` was never handled despite already being in WEBHOOK_METRIC_ACTIONS, so the case was anticipated and never implemented. Since `repositories` is keyed by full_name with no github_id, a transfer just INSERTed a fresh row and orphaned every table renameRepositoryIdentity migrates -- including repository_settings, so autonomy and gate config silently reverted to defaults while the repo kept operating, and staged approvals in agent_pending_actions were lost. Now derives the old name from changes.owner.from.{organization,user}.login plus the current repo name and runs the same identity migration as a rename. #9059(b) -- `status`/`workflow_run` invalidated the CI cache but never woke a re-review, which only moved the stall: the PR then waited on the ~2-minute sweep, which REST-budget backpressure can skip. That matters specifically because `codecov/patch` arrives as a commit STATUS and is the gate's hardest required check, so a repo whose last green signal is a status got no webhook wake at all and the gate looked hung. Now re-reviews behind the same ciReReviewCoalesced guard the check_run/check_suite path uses, so a status storm cannot amplify. Closes #9056 Closes #9057 Tests: 2 stale-payload regressions (a stale delivery cannot revert body, linked issues, title, baseRef or headRef; a newer one still updates all of them), a status-wakes-re-review test, and the two existing invalidation tests updated to pre-claim the coalesce window so the invalidation stays observable alongside the new wake. Full suite green: 22,175 passing. * fix(webhook): address review — protect authorAssociation on the returned record, and close the coverage gaps Review on #9116 was correct on both counts. 1. The returned record overrode title/headSha/headRef/baseRef/mergedAt/labels but omitted authorAssociation, so an in-process caller could still read the stale value even though the DB row was correctly protected -- contradicting the very invariant the previous commit stated. Added, and asserted on the return value (not just the stored row) in the regression test. 2. codecov/patch was low because the transferred-event derivation and the authorAssociation stale-path had no tests. Both covered now. The transfer-predecessor derivation is extracted into an exported pure helper, resolveRepositoryIdentityPredecessor, because several of its shapes are unreachable through the live pipeline -- the repository upsert running alongside this handler requires a full_name and fails first -- so they could not be tested end to end. That also let the dead `?? payload.repository.owner/name` fallbacks go: full_name is authoritative and already required. Full suite green: 22,182 passing. 100% line+branch coverage on all added lines.
This was referenced Jul 27, 2026
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
What changed
Why
Validation
Closes #108