Repository navigation
update: modify .gitignore to include create_issue and remove redund… - #121
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…ant `workflow` entry
AusAgentSmith
pushed a commit
to AusAgentSmith/openhuman
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2026
update: modify .gitignore to include `create_issue` and remove redund…
13 tasks done
M3gA-Mind
added a commit
to M3gA-Mind/openhuman
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 27, 2026
Nine subsystems load as downloaded cdylib modules. Each is pinned twice and independently: once as a git submodule (the source this repo compiles the wire contract against) and once as a version + per-platform SHA-256 in `modules/registry.rs` (the artifact actually loaded at runtime). Nothing compared them, so a stale pin compiled clean, passed every lane, and lost a capability at runtime on a user's machine — tinyhumansai#5598 (capability bitmask 8191 vs 262143), tinyhumansai#5623 (missing ListAllFacets), tinyhumansai#5641 (missing profile family). All three were fixed by bumping a pin; none added a check. The module ABI gate cannot catch this. It checks magic, ABI revision, pointer width, target triple, endianness, feature bits and panic strategy — none of which encodes WHICH RELEASE the artifact is. A correctly built older artifact is admitted without complaint. Two gates, because one cannot cover the class. `check-module-pins.mjs` asserts each of the nine records sits on the tag its `version` names, that ARTIFACT_CAPABILITIES_PIN agrees with the tinymemory record, and that every memory_version / memory_sha256 pair in the three workflows describes that same release. Changing one character of the tinymemory version raises ten findings across all five pin sites. `check-submodule-monotonic.mjs` asserts no `vendor/*` gitlink moves onto an ancestor of the pin the base branch had. This is the half that catches what has actually bitten, and it is a separate gate rather than an assertion in the first because it must cover crates that have no registry record at all: 14a23b9 vendor/tinyagents e0f3210 -> bbcd0a6 $ git -C vendor/tinyagents merge-base --is-ancestor bbcd0a6 e0f3210 (true — the new pin is an ancestor) e0f3210 is tinyagents#122 (2026-08-25), bbcd0a6 is tinyhumansai#121 (2026-08-22). That bump silently removed a shipped fix until tinyhumansai#5796 put it back, and tinyhumansai#5725 did the same eight-commit rewind (undone by tinyhumansai#5787). Both commits were internally CONSISTENT — consistent with an older release — so an equality check between the two pins would have passed them both. And `tinyagents` has no record in `ALL`: one pin, nothing to compare. Only direction catches it. The gate fails on both commits today. Coverage is 7 module crates / 9 records for the first gate and all 16 submodules for the second, and neither enumerates a fixed list. Every record in `ALL` must be named in PIN_MAP or the gate fails, so crate 17 cannot inherit an unchecked pin — six vendored crates landed in the week before this, and a guard listing the modules of the day would already be behind. tinymcp (15 commits past v0.3.1) and tinywallet (8 past v0.5.0) are drifted today, so they are declared in module-pin-exemptions.json with reasons. An exemption is not a mute button: `expect` pins the exact `git describe` output, so an exempt record cannot drift FURTHER without failing, and an exemption whose drift has been fixed fails too. Both are tested. Fail-closed throughout, because two gates here have swallowed a git error and reported clean having scanned nothing. An uninitialised submodule, an unparseable or missing registry, an unresolvable base ref, a commit missing from a submodule's object store, a `merge-base` that errors rather than answering, zero submodules, zero workflow blocks, or any uncaught throw all exit non-zero with a legible message. `[pin-rewind]` waives a declared rewind only — never an unverifiable pin. 21 tests under `node --test`, picked up by the existing Scripts Self-Tests lane. The `scripts` path filter now also watches `scripts/lib/**` and this gate's own files, which it did not: without that a change to the checking logic would skip the lane that tests it. Closes tinyhumansai#5727
M3gA-Mind
added a commit
to M3gA-Mind/openhuman
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 27, 2026
Nine subsystems load as downloaded cdylib modules. Each is pinned twice and independently: once as a git submodule (the source this repo compiles the wire contract against) and once as a version + per-platform SHA-256 in `modules/registry.rs` (the artifact actually loaded at runtime). Nothing compared them, so a stale pin compiled clean, passed every lane, and lost a capability at runtime on a user's machine — tinyhumansai#5598 (capability bitmask 8191 vs 262143), tinyhumansai#5623 (missing ListAllFacets), tinyhumansai#5641 (missing profile family). All three were fixed by bumping a pin; none added a check. The module ABI gate cannot catch this. It checks magic, ABI revision, pointer width, target triple, endianness, feature bits and panic strategy — none of which encodes WHICH RELEASE the artifact is. A correctly built older artifact is admitted without complaint. Two gates, because one cannot cover the class. `check-module-pins.mjs` asserts each of the nine records sits on the tag its `version` names, that ARTIFACT_CAPABILITIES_PIN agrees with the tinymemory record, and that every memory_version / memory_sha256 pair in the three workflows describes that same release. Changing one character of the tinymemory version raises ten findings across all five pin sites. `check-submodule-monotonic.mjs` asserts no `vendor/*` gitlink moves onto an ancestor of the pin the base branch had. This is the half that catches what has actually bitten, and it is a separate gate rather than an assertion in the first because it must cover crates that have no registry record at all: 14a23b9 vendor/tinyagents e0f3210 -> bbcd0a6 $ git -C vendor/tinyagents merge-base --is-ancestor bbcd0a6 e0f3210 (true — the new pin is an ancestor) e0f3210 is tinyagents#122 (2026-08-25), bbcd0a6 is tinyhumansai#121 (2026-08-22). That bump silently removed a shipped fix until tinyhumansai#5796 put it back, and tinyhumansai#5725 did the same eight-commit rewind (undone by tinyhumansai#5787). Both commits were internally CONSISTENT — consistent with an older release — so an equality check between the two pins would have passed them both. And `tinyagents` has no record in `ALL`: one pin, nothing to compare. Only direction catches it. The gate fails on both commits today. Coverage is 7 module crates / 9 records for the first gate and all 16 submodules for the second, and neither enumerates a fixed list. Every record in `ALL` must be named in PIN_MAP or the gate fails, so crate 17 cannot inherit an unchecked pin — six vendored crates landed in the week before this, and a guard listing the modules of the day would already be behind. tinymcp (15 commits past v0.3.1) and tinywallet (8 past v0.5.0) are drifted today, so they are declared in module-pin-exemptions.json with reasons. An exemption is not a mute button: `expect` pins the exact `git describe` output, so an exempt record cannot drift FURTHER without failing, and an exemption whose drift has been fixed fails too. Both are tested. Fail-closed throughout, because two gates here have swallowed a git error and reported clean having scanned nothing. An uninitialised submodule, an unparseable or missing registry, an unresolvable base ref, a commit missing from a submodule's object store, a `merge-base` that errors rather than answering, zero submodules, zero workflow blocks, or any uncaught throw all exit non-zero with a legible message. `[pin-rewind]` waives a declared rewind only — never an unverifiable pin. 21 tests under `node --test`, picked up by the existing Scripts Self-Tests lane. The `scripts` path filter now also watches `scripts/lib/**` and this gate's own files, which it did not: without that a change to the checking logic would skip the lane that tests it. Closes tinyhumansai#5727
senamakel
pushed a commit
to nocstah/openhuman
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 11, 2026
…dify .gitignore to include `create_issue` and remove redund…\n
senamakel
pushed a commit
to nocstah/openhuman
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 11, 2026
…s\n\nNine subsystems load as downloaded cdylib modules. Each is pinned twice and\nindependently: once as a git submodule (the source this repo compiles the\nwire contract against) and once as a version + per-platform SHA-256 in\n`modules/registry.rs` (the artifact actually loaded at runtime). Nothing\ncompared them, so a stale pin compiled clean, passed every lane, and lost a\ncapability at runtime on a user's machine — tinyhumansai#5598 (capability bitmask 8191\nvs 262143), tinyhumansai#5623 (missing ListAllFacets), tinyhumansai#5641 (missing profile family).\nAll three were fixed by bumping a pin; none added a check.\n\nThe module ABI gate cannot catch this. It checks magic, ABI revision,\npointer width, target triple, endianness, feature bits and panic strategy —\nnone of which encodes WHICH RELEASE the artifact is. A correctly built older\nartifact is admitted without complaint.\n\nTwo gates, because one cannot cover the class.\n\n`check-module-pins.mjs` asserts each of the nine records sits on the tag its\n`version` names, that ARTIFACT_CAPABILITIES_PIN agrees with the tinymemory\nrecord, and that every memory_version / memory_sha256 pair in the three\nworkflows describes that same release. Changing one character of the\ntinymemory version raises ten findings across all five pin sites.\n\n`check-submodule-monotonic.mjs` asserts no `vendor/*` gitlink moves onto an\nancestor of the pin the base branch had. This is the half that catches what\nhas actually bitten, and it is a separate gate rather than an assertion in\nthe first because it must cover crates that have no registry record at all:\n\n 3fd1de3 vendor/tinyagents e0f3210 -> bbcd0a6\n $ git -C vendor/tinyagents merge-base --is-ancestor bbcd0a6 e0f3210\n (true — the new pin is an ancestor)\n\ne0f3210 is tinyagents#122 (2026-08-25), bbcd0a6 is tinyhumansai#121 (2026-08-22). That\nbump silently removed a shipped fix until tinyhumansai#5796 put it back, and tinyhumansai#5725 did\nthe same eight-commit rewind (undone by tinyhumansai#5787). Both commits were internally\nCONSISTENT — consistent with an older release — so an equality check between\nthe two pins would have passed them both. And `tinyagents` has no record in\n`ALL`: one pin, nothing to compare. Only direction catches it. The gate\nfails on both commits today.\n\nCoverage is 7 module crates / 9 records for the first gate and all 16\nsubmodules for the second, and neither enumerates a fixed list. Every record\nin `ALL` must be named in PIN_MAP or the gate fails, so crate 17 cannot\ninherit an unchecked pin — six vendored crates landed in the week before\nthis, and a guard listing the modules of the day would already be behind.\n\ntinymcp (15 commits past v0.3.1) and tinywallet (8 past v0.5.0) are drifted\ntoday, so they are declared in module-pin-exemptions.json with reasons. An\nexemption is not a mute button: `expect` pins the exact `git describe`\noutput, so an exempt record cannot drift FURTHER without failing, and an\nexemption whose drift has been fixed fails too. Both are tested.\n\nFail-closed throughout, because two gates here have swallowed a git error\nand reported clean having scanned nothing. An uninitialised submodule, an\nunparseable or missing registry, an unresolvable base ref, a commit missing\nfrom a submodule's object store, a `merge-base` that errors rather than\nanswering, zero submodules, zero workflow blocks, or any uncaught throw all\nexit non-zero with a legible message. `[pin-rewind]` waives a declared\nrewind only — never an unverifiable pin.\n\n21 tests under `node --test`, picked up by the existing Scripts Self-Tests\nlane. The `scripts` path filter now also watches `scripts/lib/**` and this\ngate's own files, which it did not: without that a change to the checking\nlogic would skip the lane that tests it.\n\nCloses tinyhumansai#5727\n
fede-kamel
pushed a commit
to fede-kamel/openhuman
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2026
…validation fix(cron): validate delivery routing on update and rpc add
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.