Skip to content
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
46 changes: 46 additions & 0 deletions .claude/skills/running-tend/SKILL.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -91,3 +91,49 @@ These tasks run as Step 3 of the bundled weekly skill (only when
the fix has merged or the upstream problem has been addressed, close the issue
with a short comment citing the resolution (e.g., "Resolved by #NNNN —
closing"). Applies to any issue where `author.login == prql-bot`.

## Parked issues — don't open a fix PR

Some issues are open to hold a design discussion, not to hold an unclaimed bug.
Before opening a PR that fixes an issue, run both checks below — each catches a
case the other misses.

**Search prior PRs by the symbol the fix touches, not the issue number.** The
rejected approach is usually a closed PR on the same call site, filed before the
issue existed and so citing no issue number at all:

```sh
gh pr list --state all --limit 20 --search "<function or symbol name>" \
--json number,title,state --jq '.[] | "\(.state) #\(.number) \(.title)"'
Comment thread
prql-bot marked this conversation as resolved.
# the list carries no reason — read a closed PR's own comments before dismissing it:
gh pr view <pr-number> --json comments,reviews \
--jq '[.comments[], .reviews[]] | map({author: .author.login, body: .body})'
```

Searching `6166` returns #6206 and #6164 and a stray dependency bump, but not
#6147 — the rejected attempt this section exists to catch, opened two days
before the issue. Searching `fold_module_def_stmt`, the call site all three PRs
edit, returns every one of them.

**Read the issue's comment bodies, not the count.** The 2026-08-18 nightly (run
`32109908394`) projected `COMMENTS: \(.comments|length)`, so a prior run's note
on #6166 saying not to open another PR was never in context:

```sh
gh issue view <n> --json comments \
--jq '.comments[] | "\(.author.login) (\(.authorAssociation)): \(.body)"'
```

A PR closed on the _approach_ rather than the code means the semantics are still
a maintainer's call, and a fresh PR taking that same approach is noise however
well it is implemented. In that case investigate, reproduce, and add findings to
the issue thread, but leave the PR until a maintainer specifically asks for one.

Parked today:

- **#6166** — duplicate `module` definitions. Whether re-declaring a module
merges or errors is a maintainer decision, and the maintainer has asked
directly on that thread that no further PRs be opened on it unless
specifically directed. #6147 and #6206 both took the merging approach and were
closed on it. Remove this entry once #6166 closes or a maintainer asks for a
fix.
Loading