test(dependency-check): fix the assertion that left main red - #522
Merged
Conversation
…returns
My own test from the previous commit was wrong, not the code: it expected
normalize_version("13.0.5+gitea-1.22.0") to yield "13.0.5". That helper strips
a leading tool name ("codex-cli 0.117.0" -> "0.117.0"), not a build suffix.
Keeping the suffix is the better behaviour anyway — "+gitea-1.22.0" is how an
operator tells which Gitea API generation their Forgejo speaks, which is
exactly what a dependency report exists to surface.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ProtocolWarden
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 19, 2026
…524) The Plane -> Forgejo migration ran off direct operator requests and was never tracked in the backlog, so nothing in `.console/` tells a future session it happened or why the codebase looks the way it does now. Adds the Done entry (with the recon finding that reshaped it: Plane was never live on this host, so the planned drain was vacuous) and the two items it left open: * **CI runs ~1,830 fewer tests than exist.** No longer hypothetical — #521 merged a NEW failing test because `tests/test_dependency_check.py` is in no CI job, and main was red until #522. #513 was the same story a week earlier. Recorded with the 6 currently-failing tests that make switching the gate on a decision rather than a chore, and the sensible order: fix those 6, then add the suites in the PR that proves them green. * **`audit` on Forgejo Actions** — the last line of the PR-adapter spec, blocked on an operator installing a runner. Everything upstream is done. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ProtocolWarden
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 19, 2026
… it (#525) * ci: gate the ~1,830 tests that had no job, and fix the 6 that blocked it Two dedicated jobs already exist for single files that rotted unnoticed (tests/test_pr_review_watcher.py, tests/integration/reviewer) — each added AFTER that suite had drifted. This generalises the fix instead of waiting for the next one. What the gap cost, concretely: #509 shipped a regression that broke tests/maintenance/, found a week later by hand in #513. #521 merged a brand new failing test in tests/test_dependency_check.py — CI green, reviewer verdict SUCCESS, main red until #522. tests/test_proposer_entrypoint.py had been failing since the board-seam migration weeks earlier and nothing noticed. Switching the gate on required fixing 6 failures, and they were not what they looked like: FOUR WERE BAD MOCKS, NOT BUGS. They raised FileNotFoundError("message") — with no errno. pathlib's predicates swallow only ignorable errnos (ENOENT, ENOTDIR, EBADF, ELOOP), so an errno-less error escapes is_file()/is_dir(), which a real vanished path never does. Verified identically on 3.11 and 3.12: deleting a directory mid-scan makes glob() return []. The mocks were testing CPython's exception plumbing, not the collectors' guards. They now raise the way the OS does. My first attempt "fixed" production by guarding the walk against deletion — defending against something that cannot happen — and is reverted. ONE WAS A REAL GAP THE BAD MOCK WAS HIDING. EACCES and EIO are NOT ignorable, so a log directory that becomes unreadable (rather than deleted) does raise straight out of the walk and takes the collector with it. latest_matching_file now guards the walk for OSError, with the distinction written down, because "return None when nothing is discoverable" is its contract. ONE WAS A REAL PRODUCTION BUG. custodian_sweep._emit answered zero-findings before its dry-run branch could run, so that branch was unreachable and a dry run reported "skipped-zero-findings" — the past tense, for work it had not done. Two tests in the same file asserted opposite labels for the same call; the module's own would-comment / would-create convention and the shadowed branch both say `would-` was intended. ONE WAS A STALE PATCH TARGET: proposer.main.PlaneClient stopped existing at the board migration. Patched at the seam now. Verified: tests/unit 8623 passed, the new job's exact command 1830 passed, both 0 failed. ruff clean, ty at the 13-diagnostic baseline, custodian doctor OK, audit clean. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(observer): walk dependency reports with iterdir, not glob The new test-rest job went red on its first CI run — which is the job doing its job. Three failures, all in dependency_drift, none reproducible on 3.12: CPython 3.11's glob() stats every matched path through exists(); 3.12's does not. Two of the tests counted Path.stat calls to prove the collector does not re-stat after discovery — a fair question, but the counter was also counting the interpreter's probing. The third needed one unreadable run directory to be skipped while the rest are still read. My first attempt made it worse: wrapping the walk in list(glob(...)) meant a single bad entry aborted discovery, turning "skip run1, use run2" into not_available. glob() is a generator, so the first error closes it — per-entry recovery inside it is not possible at all. _latest_dependency_report now walks with iterdir(), which stats nothing: * one unreadable entry is skipped, not fatal (EACCES/EIO are NOT among the errnos pathlib swallows, unlike ENOENT/ENOTDIR/EBADF/ELOOP) * the counting assertions see only the collector's own stat calls, on either interpreter, so the test-side glob patching I added is removed as both unnecessary and ineffective — it still called the real glob() Verified on both: 3.12 locally 1830 passed, 3.11 in a python:3.11-slim container 1828 passed with the 3 fixed. The container also reports 2 failures CI does not (test_resolve_repos_root_falls_back_to_checkout_layout, test_loader_reads_latest_snapshot_with_bounded_history) — it mounts a flat worktree with no sibling checkouts, which is what those two probe. CI is the authority for CI. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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
1 participant
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.
Main is red.
tests/test_dependency_check.py::test_board_status_reports_version_and_healthfails on6f0a55e4.The test is mine, from #521, and the assertion was wrong — not the code:
That helper strips a leading tool name (
"codex-cli 0.117.0"→"0.117.0"), not a build suffix. Keeping the suffix is the better behaviour anyway:+gitea-1.22.0is how an operator tells which Gitea API generation their Forgejo speaks — exactly what a dependency report exists to surface.How it reached main
Two things lined up:
git pushin one script, so the push didn't wait on the result. Gate first, read, then push — the ordering was the mistake, not the assertion.tests/test_dependency_check.pyis not in any CI job. CI runstests/unit,tests/test_pr_review_watcher.py,tests/integration/reviewer, andtests/integration/observer. So CI was green, the reviewer's verdict was SUCCESS, and feat(board): delete the Plane adapter — the migration is complete #521 merged with a red test in an un-gated suite — while I was fixing it on the branch, which by then belonged to a closed PR.This is the un-gated-suite gap I flagged in #512 landing for real, rather than hypothetically. Roughly 1,830 tests sit outside the gate; this one was new and still invisible.
Verification
tests/test_dependency_check.py: 1 failed, 10 passed → 11 passed.🤖 Generated with Claude Code