test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check - #14750

Merged
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

test(plugin-approvals): pin the lock release in the tenant-admin reverse check#14750
os-sales merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
claude/issue-14602-tenant-admin-lock-release-pin

Conversation

@os-sales

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fixes#14602

The #12775 override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check — "the narrowing is about status, not posture" — proved a strict subset of the platform-admin case it mirrors: recalled status plus the action row, and nothing at all about the record lock. This makes the pair symmetric.

The diff — one file, two lines

packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, inside reverse check (tenant admin):

- const { req } = await pendingRequest();+ const { req, editAttempt } = await pendingRequest();+ await expect(editAttempt()).rejects.toThrow(/RECORD_LOCKED/); // pending → locked
const out = await service.recall(req.id, { actorId: 'org_owner' }, TENANT_ADMIN);
expect(out.request.status).toBe('recalled');
expect(await actionsOf(req.id)).toContain('recall');
+ await expect(editAttempt()).resolves.toBeUndefined(); // the #3424 release still happens

Both lines were added, not just the release one. The release assertion alone would have left the case proving a strict subset of what it mirrors one level down: it passes vacuously if the lock never engages for this posture, and "released at the end" is a weaker claim than the locked → released the platform-admin case pins. The pre-condition is what makes released mean released by the recall. Both lines are byte-copies of the platform-admin case four cases above, comment column included.

No product file was touched, and nothing in #12775's ruled behaviour is reopened.

What was measured

Suitepnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals test, before and after, both Test Files 36 passed (36) / Tests 662 passed (662). The count is identical because both assertions land inside an existing it, so the suite total is not evidence the case ran. The targeted run is:

✓ … > reverse check: the same override actor still recalls the same request while `pending`, and the flag says so 41ms
✓ … > reverse check (tenant admin): admitted on `pending` too — the narrowing is about status, not posture 4ms
Test Files 1 passed (1)
Tests 2 passed | 22 skipped (24)

The after-run above is on this PR's head 423a3405d, after origin/main was merged in.

Ablation — the new lines are load-bearing, not decorative. Committed first, then the release assertion was moved to before the recall; the mutation was confirmed on disk (the assertion's in-case line index moved ahead of the recall's) before the run. Predicted direction: red, because the record is still locked at that point. Observed:

AssertionError: promise rejected "Error: RECORD_LOCKED: record 'x1' of 'fin… { …(2) }" instead of resolving
Test Files 1 failed (1)
Tests 1 failed | 23 skipped (24)

Restored with git checkout HEAD -- ABS_PATH under an EXIT INT TERM trap; restoration proven by blob hash, e0a7dc8da831ff1ff9fbe837dbd743e3ebd34913 before and after, with git diff HEAD empty. So the lock genuinely engages on this path and only the recall releases it.

Typecheckpnpm --filter @objectstack/plugin-approvals typecheck exit 0. The package's own tsconfig.json excludes **/*.test.ts, so that leg says nothing about the edited file; the leg that does is check:test-typecheck (tsconfig.test.json), and tsc --listFiles -p tsconfig.test.json was used to confirm the edited file is in that program rather than assumed to be. Gate verdict: check:test-typecheck: OK — @objectstack/plugin-approvals's test layer compiles … 8 file(s) / 324 error(s) / 27 pinned signature(s) held in test-typecheck-debt.json (shrink-only and identity-pinned).

Gates — derived from the actual change set rather than recalled, via node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --commands re-run on the merged tree: 29 commands, 25 exit 0. The four non-zero all refuse for an unmet local prerequisite and say so themselves — none is a finding, and none is a pass:

gateexitits own verdict
check-test-completeness.mjs3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate grades a saved turbo run test log, and no log was named… the local reading for this gate is NOT MEASURED"
check:dual-build-cjs-loads3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — this gate reads built output, and some package has no dist/… ⛔ This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured"
check:i18n1"PREREQUISITE NOT MET — the workspace CLI is not built… Nothing was checked"
check:type-check-debt3"PREREQUISITE NOT MET … ⛔ This is NOT a pass and NOT a finding: nothing was measured"

CI runs all four against a built tree.

Clause ② — no, re-derived from this diff

git diff -U0 origin/main...HEAD | grep -E '^[+-].*export' returns no matches (grep exit 1, 0 lines). The change set is one path, packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts — a test file that exports nothing to the package entry point, changes no accept/reject behaviour and widens no public surface.

Changeset — none owed; skip-changeset applied

The diff publishes nothing from any package: one .test.ts, excluded from the built output. No empty-frontmatter changeset was added to look complete — check-empty-changeset.mjs rejects exactly that.

Seen, deliberately not touched

src/approval-revise.test.ts:22 imports APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE and never uses it — pre-existing on origin/main, and already carried as frozen debt (test-typecheck-debt.json holds TS6133: 'APPROVALS_HOOK_PACKAGE' is declared but its value is never read. at count 1 for this file). Different defect class from this card, and clearing it would move a ledger; left alone and reported instead.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8


Generated by Claude Code

…rse check
The `#12775` override-narrowing block's tenant-admin reverse check
("the narrowing is about status, not posture") proved a strict subset of
the platform-admin case it mirrors: `recalled` status plus the action
row, but nothing about the record lock. The platform-admin case pins
`locked → released` around the recall; this makes the pair symmetric with
the same two lines, in the same idiom.
Both lines, not just the release: asserting only the release would pass
vacuously if the lock never engaged for this posture, which is the same
"proves a subset of what it mirrors" weakness one level down.
Test-only. No product change; the ruled behaviour from #12775 is
untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AUF1NoViznQK32gqpK8wS8
@claudeclaudeBot added the skip-changeset PR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gate label Sep 2, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📓 Docs Drift Check

Nothing in this diff resolved to a documentable surface (no symbol, route or SDK anchor derived from 0 changed package(s)), so this run has no opinion about the docs.

What this run could not see
  • a page that states a rule by its inputs shares no identifier with the emitter that implements the rule, so an emitter-only diff cannot list it — not on this run and not on any run. Measured on fix(driver-sql): emit varchar(maxLength) for a text field a declared index keys on #11430: content/docs/protocol/objectql/types.mdx documents the text-family column mapping by the ObjectQL type names it maps FROM (text / textarea / html) while the diff changed createColumn; it went unlisted, and it was the page that diff falsified, in four places. No shared token exists to detect this on, so a rule your change carries has to be re-read by hand in the pages that restate it.

Coarse fallback — 0 page(s) merely mention a changed package (the pre-#9192 predicate, kept for the deliberately-wide backstop): node scripts/docs-audit/affected-docs.mjs --json 7a17f3bf1e48e1e88f8e833a794e37bd40230f17packageMentionDocs.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33702957362 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • 本 PR 过去 24h 无队列失败记录(首次)。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 35 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

@claude

claudeBot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Dequeued 01:42Z — not this PR's failure. Re-arming once, and saying why.

The failing check, read rather than assumed

Queue build 33702957362. One job red — Test Core (1/6), step Run this shard's tests:

packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts:317
the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back
> gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null

Failed: @objectstack/cli#test, 65 of 66 turbo tasks successful. check-test-completeness in the same job reports OK (10 of 10 scheduled package(s) reported … 5256 test(s) declared and all accounted for), so the shard ran whole rather than dying early.

This PR's diff is one file — packages/plugins/plugin-approvals/src/approval-revise.test.ts, +3/−1. It cannot reach packages/cli. This is the 9th ejection tonight on the same assertion at the same line, across PRs whose diffs cannot reach that file. Anchor: #14648.

Why the fix is not portable into this PR

PR #14715 fixes it (UNREAD_HARD_CAP_MS becomes the load-independent RUN_TIMEOUT_MS), and the standing rule is to port a fix rather than wait. It touches exactly one file — packages/cli/test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts — and #14715 is open and claims it. Porting would put two open PRs on one path and turn this repo's own No other open PR may claim the same single-writer path check red on this PR: trading a probabilistic flake for a certain failure. The port is closed by repo machinery, not by preference.

What happens now

Re-arming auto-merge once. This is this PR's first ejection, and the same one-re-queue allowance #14528 got. The queue is not stalled — #14712, #14718 and #14730 all merged through it in the last half hour — so a second attempt is a real chance rather than a ritual.

One only. A second ejection on this signature is data for #14648, not a third arming. Nothing about this PR changes in the meantime: it is green on 423a3405d and its content is settled.


Generated by Claude Code

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

⛔ merge queue 构建失败 — 先分诊,再决定要不要重排

队列构建 33707742212 红了。队列跑的是全量套件(PR 侧 CI 只跑 affected 子集),
所以失败的测试可能在本 PR 没碰过的包里 —— 那不是重排能修的。每次盲目重排都会让排在后面的所有 PR 重建一轮。

失败的 job(日志抽取,best effort):

  • Test Core (1/6) — 失败步骤: Run this shard's tests

    @objectstack/cli:test: FAIL integration test/run-dev-unbuilt-workspace.e2e.test.ts > the mirror direction: a reader that is never coming back > gives up and exits instead of waiting forever
    ↳ 失败原因: @objectstack/cli:test: AssertionError: expected 'SIGKILL' to be null
    

↳ 失败原因 是判读的关键:超时Test timed out in … / Hook timed out in …)多半是负载/时序,不是本 PR 的回归;
断言AssertionError: …)才指向真实的行为改变。两者的 FAIL 行长得一模一样,只有这一行能区分。

⚠️断言这一侧有一类例外,判据是断言在测什么,不是它是不是 AssertionError 断言的对象是产品行为(一个值、一个形状、一次拒收)⇒ 照上面读:真实的行为改变,去查,⛔ 不要重排掉;
断言的对象是这次实验自身的有效性前提(跑完的耗时、负载下的先后、任何只在时间预算内才成立的条件)⇒ 它跟超时是同一类,同样对负载敏感,重排一次是合法的判别手段。
识别是机械的:断言的消息或它比较的值本身点名了一段时长、一个时间戳、一个耗时计数。实测过的一对 —— AssertionError: SecurityPlugin.init() ran: expected false to be true 测的是产品行为(真回归);
AssertionError: this run took over a second, so second-precision stamps could have differed too: expected 1006 to be less than 1000 测的是实验前提:它守护的那条不变式当时是绿的,同一个 head 原样重排一次即成功。
穿着 AssertionError 外衣的时间测量,仍然是时间测量。(⛔ 这只改「怎么读一次红」,不改「哪些测试可以重排」——后者由别处管。)

跨 PR 相同签名(24h,按失败测试文件聚合):

历史信号:

  • ⚠️本 PR 过去 24h 已在队列失败 1 次(不含本次)。 内容未变而反复失败 ⇒ 高度怀疑 flaky 测试或与同组 PR 的语义冲突,重排不解决。
  • 过去 24h 队列共有 42 个失败构建(不含本次)。

分诊清单:

  1. 失败测试在本 PR 改动的包里 → 真回归,修 PR。
  2. 失败测试与本 PR 无关 → 看上面的「跨 PR 相同签名」;已有汇总 issue ⇒ flaky/环境问题实锤,去那张 issue 上谈,修好前重排只会再烧一轮全队列。
  3. 两者都不是 → 可能与同组 PR 语义冲突;等前面的 PR 落地或失败出队后再重排一次即可,不要连续重排。

Generated by Claude Code · merge-queue-triage workflow (#4859)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size/xsskip-changesetPR has no user-facing published change; bypasses the changeset gatetests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[finding] plugin-approvals after #12775: the tenant-admin reverse check never asserts the lock release

2 participants

@os-sales@claude