test(ci): inventory Windows-capable workflows and reusable callers - #3297
Conversation
|
@codex review Please review exact source head Observed current-head hosted evidence: Self-Test run 35516849706, job 106094137527. Logs show Ubuntu 24.04.5, Node v24.13.1, synthetic merge Required CI and CI Extended are not yet claimed complete; this is a review request, not approval. Keep draft while validation/review remains pending. R4 maintainer plus fresh-context review remains the merge gate; no auto-merge or rehearsal activation. |
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: 5cfa0eb481
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: 5cfa0eb481
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".
1d75fe0 to
5dd2161
Compare
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🎉 Reviewed commit: 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". |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 77308c82ff
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".
|
@codex review Please review the exact current head f7368d9. This adds YAML-property-aware keep-chomp preservation, a bounded reviewed-surface projection, matching regression tests, and the documented bound. Treat prior threads as addressed; report only merge-blocking correctness or security defects at this exact head. |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Another round soon, please! Reviewed commit: 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". |
f7368d9 to
ff5099d
Compare
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: ff5099db7c
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".
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 277851c300
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".
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 00ebe3fb7f
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".
edcdbcd to
e4dba40
Compare
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff. Reviewed commit: 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". |
1 participant
Scope
A bounded, non-activating prerequisite for #3170 (CI-17); refs #2337 and the difficult-issue map in #3281. This does not close #3170 or implement the private-cutover rehearsal guard.
Based on main
307c3b8b50bec1cb0bfaea3e570a942bcb1d4451. The uploaded ZIP was 45 commits behind, but GitHub comparison confirmed the workflow/Smart CI/policy inputs are unchanged. Remote commits use actual main ancestry and add only four new files; unrelated backend/frontend changes and other sessions' #3295/#3296 work are preserved.Changes
platform: linuxproves scheduling safety.graphCompleteand CLI exit 0 mean discovery succeeded, not zero Windows work, guarded execution or permission to skip CI. This is a deliberately limited block-mapping scanner, not a general YAML parser, Actions validator or protected-base policy. The snapshot is PR-editable and is not a security boundary. No workflow, policy, required check, runner association, credentials, visibility, budget or human acceptance box changes.Current source and verification
Source head:
5cfa0eb481a2fe38732f1d71e1d6a4866fb1698f. All four remote blob hashes match the verified local files. The initial snapshot transcription omitted one word in a workflow description; this was corrected before the current-head hosted run.Hosted evidence observed at this exact source head:
22957820aeb51e0811a1afd6f04dfeeafb0e84fe(5cfa0ebinto307c3b8), 601 tests passing, zero failures/skips/cancellations, and the external action-pin guard passing.35516849980.35516849908at the latest read. This is not full-matrix qualification.Local Linux / Node 22.16.0:
Local or hosted Linux junction execution is not Windows runtime qualification; unrelated .NET/frontend suites were not run locally. Exact-head status changes and review findings will be recorded in comments as observed.
Remaining work and review authority
Trusted-base mode propagation, real guard coverage, non-vacuous Linux/security evidence, receipts and the public/private rehearsal matrix remain separate #3170 work. Do not auto-merge. R4 requires maintainer review plus fresh-context review (or an explicit ruling naming this PR). J.3(b)/J.4 human decisions remain unchanged; canonical OUTSTANDING_TASKS.md J.2 registration needs coordinator follow-through. Draft retained while exact-head checks/review are pending.