Skip to content

[G01] Align command fixtures with workflow provenance - #162

Merged
jjangg96 merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
orca/issue-1-g01-core-ci-regressions
Nov 3, 2026
Merged

jjangg96 merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
orca/issue-1-g01-core-ci-regressions

Conversation

@jjangg96

@jjangg96 jjangg96 commented Nov 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Part of #1

Summary

  • Align the ACK fixture with the optional durable workflow-provenance GET lifecycle and verify its slot, attempt, journal, and source binding to the broker claim.
  • Verify read-token lifecycle and completion positions relative to the claim.
  • Qualify a fresh attempt for an occupied phase at the correct boundary: when account-level workflow GET confirmation exists, it must stop before another provider request, token mint, or approval snapshot. Preserve the pre-[G01] Account workflow provenance GET lifecycle #161 fixture behavior against current main.
  • This PR does not complete G01; Issue [G01] Prove Scale Set delivery, acquisition and drain contracts #1 stays open for live qualification.

TDD and verification

  • RED: the exact combined PR [G01] Account workflow provenance GET lifecycle #161 source with the original fixture failed the broker ledger-count assertion. After accounting for the new events, the deeper test exposed the stale expectation that a duplicate phase should perform another workflow GET.
  • GREEN: race-instrumented helper preparation passed on current-main and combined PR [G01] Account workflow provenance GET lifecycle #161 source; TestExperimentalACKBoundaryCommand passed under -race on both; TestExperimentalAcquireLossCommand passed under -race on current main.
  • Go 1.27.3, with module downloads disabled and Go caches/temp on /Volumes/worktree.
  • No provider credential, runner, Scale Set, Docker, host service, or canary operation was used.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-11-03T16:41:51.125186Z 707164b Manual request
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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@jjangg96

jjangg96 commented Nov 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 22189c383e

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".

@jjangg96

jjangg96 commented Nov 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

Reviewed commit: 707164b1b1

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".

@jjangg96

jjangg96 commented Nov 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Review finding triage — head 707164b1b1cab0198f376e18244b11140b3bd044

  • Codex P2: drain mint assertion — fixed. The v3 fixture now requires exactly two mints (one read-only, one management) and one revocation. All four drain variants pass on this head and with PR [G01] Account workflow provenance GET lifecycle #161's provenance-accounting changes applied.
  • Codex P2: replay specimen policy mismatch — fixed. Receiver negatives now derive the request and callee from the selected policy grant, assert exact request equality, and verify with that policy's trust roots. ACK and acquisition-loss fixtures pass on this head and in the combined PR [G01] Account workflow provenance GET lifecycle #161/[G01] Align command fixtures with workflow provenance #162 source.
  • Luna P1 on prior head 22189c3: original-context ACK/acquisition-loss failure — not reproduced; evidence-based rebuttal. On the final source, original-context ACK continue/cancel and acquisition-loss continue/cancel each passed five race-instrumented repetitions. The full ACK/acquisition-loss/drain selectors also passed on this head and on the combined PR [G01] Account workflow provenance GET lifecycle #161/[G01] Align command fixtures with workflow provenance #162 source.
  • Luna P2: workflow provenance event matching — fixed. Tests now require the started/confirmed pair to match its claim's slot, attempt, journal, approval digest, source, and workflow run/ref/SHA/path. Mutation cases for each identity field reject mismatches.

The focused current-source helper preparation, fixture race selectors, and separate-process handoff race selectors passed locally. GitHub Go checks passed and @codex review completed with no findings on this exact head. All verification was offline; no canary or live runner operation was performed.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To use Codex here, create an environment for this repo.

@jjangg96
jjangg96 merged commit 14d22c0 into main Nov 3, 2026
1 check passed
@jjangg96
jjangg96 deleted the orca/issue-1-g01-core-ci-regressions branch November 3, 2026 16:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant