You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Dispose of Two Wording Findings Left After the Local Review Budget on auto-2251 #2376
How should two wording findings, left open after the local review edit budget ran out on handoff #2375 (track auto-2251, fixing #2251), be disposed of?
The local-strict-review budget allows two rounds of edits per push, and the third pass on branch feature/auto-2251 (head fe1c2124, pushed, no pull request yet) still raised two findings classed introduced. Neither is a behavior defect. Every pass found the code correct, and both findings are text that is broader than the code it describes. The counts per class from that third pass are 2 introduced, 0 pre-existing, and 0 style.
scripts/README.md: the new sentence says a row naming no changed path "is read again without a trailing parenthesized note", while note_head drops a note only where whitespace stands before the ( and the note holds no parenthesis of its own. So a row such as docs/a.md(cleanup) refuses where the README suggests it would not. That is the safe direction, and the note_head docstring states both conditions.
tests/test_pr_review.py, test_a_note_is_kept_where_the_row_names_a_path_with_it: its docstring says a changed path or shortened tail ending in parentheses "reads as written", but its first case, docs/a (draft).md (cleanup), is read with the note dropped, the path keeping only its inner parentheses.
Options
Recommended: fix both wordings in one more edit round, then drive the pull request into develop. Both are one-line text changes with no effect on behavior, and the next local pass then reviews only that wording. The parked branch carries straight on.
Fix the test docstring only, and decline the README finding with the evidence that note_head's docstring is the definition of a note. This keeps the README at summary level, per the practice of keeping a parser's detail in the parser. The branch carries on the same way.
Push the branch to a pull request as it stands and let the hosted reviewers judge both. This spends a review round on wording a local pass already found.
Blocks
Handoff #2375 and branch feature/auto-2251. No pull request is open yet, so no pull request is blocked beyond the one this lane would open.
Answered by the maintainer in an attended session: option 1. Fix both wordings in one more edit round on feature/auto-2251: the scripts/README.md sentence on when a trailing note is dropped, and the test_a_note_is_kept_where_the_row_names_a_path_with_it docstring. Then record a pass and drive the pull request into develop. The work continues on handoff #2375.
Activity
ptr727 commentedon Oct 5, 2026
Answered by the maintainer in an attended session: option 1. Fix both wordings in one more edit round on
feature/auto-2251: thescripts/README.mdsentence on when a trailing note is dropped, and thetest_a_note_is_kept_where_the_row_names_a_path_with_itdocstring. Then record a pass and drive the pull request into develop. The work continues on handoff #2375.