Skip to content

Point the hub debt at the issue carrying the proposed wording #18

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
ptr727 merged 4 commits into from
Aug 4, 2026
Merged

Point the hub debt at the issue carrying the proposed wording #18

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
c0917b8
Point the hub debt at the issue carrying the proposed wording
ptr727 Aug 4, 2026
da04642
Name the repository in the hub issue reference
ptr727 Aug 4, 2026
a6843c3
Record the review tooling the hub already authors
ptr727 Aug 4, 2026
994fa64
Drop the counted cross-reference from the tooling note
ptr727 Aug 4, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 4 additions & 1 deletion TODO.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ The site is built and gated in CI. It is on GitHub, and it is not yet serving it

## Owed to the hub

The hub is owed a spec update for this repo's publishing type, tracked in [ProjectTemplate#456][hub-issue]. The measured deploy shape is reported there.
The hub is owed a spec update for this repo's publishing type. The change is [ProjectTemplate#558][hub-spec-issue], carrying proposed wording for both additions, and [ProjectTemplate#456][hub-issue] holds the intake questions and the measured answers.

**Frame it as a variant of the existing registry-push leaf, not a new release surface.** A NuGet or PyPI leaf builds an artifact and pushes it to its own destination, contributing no `release-asset-*`. This repo does exactly that. Only two things differ, and neither changes the seam:

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -99,6 +99,8 @@ Each of these was hit or nearly hit, and each is cheap to re-trip.
- **Do not name any workflow `build-*-task.yml`** while the repo declares `source-only`, since `detect` is literally `["no build-*-task.yml"]`.
- **Do not edit `.markdownlint-cli2.jsonc`, `repo-config/configure.sh`, or the two ruleset payloads.** They are carried verbatim and byte-matched against the hub. Scope a glob in the workflow instead. A reviewer finding a real defect in one of them is answered by declining locally and filing it at the hub, never by editing the file to satisfy the review.
- **The hub's `main` can promote while a convergence pull request is open**, so ground truth moves underneath work that was correct when it started. It happened twice in one session on 2026-08-03, and the second time added drift the branch could not have known about. Re-run the audit against the hub ref actually carried before claiming convergence, and name that ref in the change, or the claim ages into a false one.
- **The hub authors `scripts/pr_review.py`, and hand-rolling the review loop re-discovers its bugs.** One `status` call reports rounds, head coverage, unresolved threads, suppressed findings across every round, and whether a request was ever picked up. `wait` runs the backoff in-process, so a review wait costs one turn rather than one per poll. It is read-only by design and the mutations stay explicit, so fetch and run it rather than reimplementing it. Its README documents the traps below as the reason it exists.
- **A review request can sit forever without being picked up, which looks exactly like patience.** Copilot raises a `copilot_work_started` timeline event within about half a minute of accepting; a request that never draws one is not slow, it is inert, and elapsed time cannot tell them apart. The event is REST-only. Recover by clearing the request with `union: false` and an empty `botIds`, then requesting again, after reading the pending set so a human reviewer is not dropped.
- **The Copilot reviewer's login differs by API, and a wrong-form filter reads as a clean review.** REST reports `copilot-pull-request-reviewer[bot]`, GraphQL omits the suffix. A filter written in the other form matches nothing, and an empty result is indistinguishable from no findings. Assert the filter matched before trusting what it returned.
- **A Copilot review hides findings in the review body, where the thread API cannot see them.** The `reviewThreads` query returns line threads only, so a review carrying `Suppressed comments (N)` in a `<details>` block reports zero unresolved while real findings sit unread. Read the review body itself, not just the threads, before calling a review loop finished.
- **`gh pr merge --delete-branch` on a `develop -> main` promotion deletes `develop`.** Use a plain `gh pr merge --merge`.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -136,6 +138,7 @@ Secrets and variables, per environment. The App-token pair is repository-scoped
<!-- External -->

[hub-issue]: https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate/issues/456
[hub-spec-issue]: https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate/issues/558
[hub-registry]: https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate/blob/3b802b9eb9a841c0149d018f4db6ffa1b9419051/registry/repos.json
[hub-report]: https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate/blob/3b802b9eb9a841c0149d018f4db6ffa1b9419051/reports/blog/audit.md
[issue-549]: https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate/issues/549
Expand Down