Repository navigation
fix(coverage): clarify requested scope and deferred work - #586
Conversation
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: f7ca16c408
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d384888a9a
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 855e95acd6
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
mldangelo-oai
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 4a377d56f9
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
alandelong-oai
left a comment
alandelong-oai
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed c7b7824fcc12 against its exact updated base. The full feature patch and dependency inputs are unchanged from the independently reviewed 99c8b69993a5; the intervening changes match the separately reviewed main integration. No material issue found. Thanks for the update.
Validation: exact feature/dependency comparisons support reusing the prior focused tests and reproductions with their recorded limitations; those suites were not rerun on this rebase. The shared main integration was independently reviewed and its 189 owner/configuration/CLI checks passed. This does not claim a complete current-head integration or platform run.
![github-code-quality[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/9919?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”. ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
|
Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”. ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
Summary
Show requested scan scope clearly in CLI summaries and saved history, and separate deferred requested work from optional report follow-up.
Changes
mainsnapshot while preserving its source-scan execution outcomes, exit codes, schemas, and SARIF success semantics.coverage.deferredseparately from optionalcoverage.openQuestionsin reports. Keep ordinary path quoting and terminal-control escaping without adding a Unicode normalization policy.Testing
Validated candidate
e1ca3e13accb44cdb1489c45b72597a89bd05b13, integrating the reviewed #1710 refresh atd5ebdbf5f09d3c22fc2cae781313a68823eaac29andmainat00b0ac57dc5d5878908b51e31761332f89c1a24e. Merge #1710 before this PR. The merge was clean and leaves this PR's scope/history feature diff byte-for-byte unchanged.build:ci, plugin source compatibility, and the source check's nine self-tests.git diff --checkpassed. Independent review found no integration issue; recorded-target validation still precedes the history reader and retained-coverage helpers match their callers.Checks ran on Linux with Node 22.23.2, Bun 1.3.14, and Python 3.12.13. Dependency installations were reused only after matching dependency maps and lockfiles. The fresh plugin build reused the verified native-universal artifact; its native source inputs are unchanged. Native binaries were not rebuilt locally.
The 23 focused SDK tests recorded for
8a142f175c7c047bc9ac558a926247281698519e, and the 261 Python and 38 SDK tests recorded for33f55a654a269b8e8b86fb5088db97e27c800509, remain historical validation for those revisions. Full SDK suites, installed-package smoke tests, and cross-platform execution were not repeated for this focused refresh. Fresh hosted CI is required for the new head. The disclosure qualifications below are unchanged.Risk and rollout
The change is limited to scope presentation and historical scope retrieval. It adds no commands, flags, accepted values, public environment variables, defaults, migrations, or schema versions.
The older branch's partial/unknown source-completion and unsuccessful-SARIF changes are intentionally removed to retain current
mainbehavior. Deferred work remains visible without changing execution status. History summaries require verified artifacts, but missing unrelated files do not hide already saved findings.Public disclosure review
The earlier published source records review of its candidate diff, branch/title/body, available commit messages and review/conversation comments, six CI log archives, 29 artifacts (including package contents and native payloads), and four CodeQL SARIF reports. The main integration diff, all 15 feature files, current public metadata, available discussion and new validation logs were reviewed again. No sensitive additions were identified. No attached screenshots or user-uploaded media were found.
The prior description records unavailable historical artifacts and log archives; those unavailable bytes are not represented as reviewed. Fresh CI artifacts must be checked after publication.