tests: make bridge verification reproducible and auditable - #554
tests: make bridge verification reproducible and auditable#554bringhurst wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
948c3e4 to
d2667de
Compare
d2667de to
cbe9cf0
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Changes recommended
verify_li_bridge.sh can leave verification-summary.json claiming success even if the final evidence-audit stage fails, making the recorded evidence internally inconsistent.
Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.
Pull request overview
Adds a reproducible “bridge verification” workflow for validating a 3.0-li → 3.9-li migration, including evidence capture, resumable execution, and a strict evidence auditor with unit coverage.
Changes:
- Introduces
verify_li_bridge.shto run a staged verification plan (compiles, focused/full tests, artifact staging, mixed-process migration) while recording evidence. - Adds
audit_li_bridge_evidence.pyto validate evidence completeness and internal consistency (commands, fingerprints, archives, transitions, protocol-selection logs). - Adds
stage_li_bridge_ivy.shplus new unit tests covering the auditor’s acceptance/rejection cases.
File summaries
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| tests/unit/li_bridge_evidence_audit_test.py | Unit tests for the evidence auditor (valid evidence + key failure modes). |
| tests/bin/verify_li_bridge.sh | End-to-end verification runner that records evidence and supports resume/dry-run/full modes. |
| tests/bin/stage_li_bridge_ivy.sh | Local artifact staging script for the wrapper’s Ivy-style layout. |
| tests/bin/audit_li_bridge_evidence.py | Evidence auditing logic for coverage and consistency checks. |
Review details
- Files reviewed: 1/4 changed files
- Comments generated: 0
- Review effort level: Lite
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
872788b to
f885fe7
Compare
f885fe7 to
981cff5
Compare
981cff5 to
ffcdc18
Compare
ffcdc18 to
2400bc1
Compare
2400bc1 to
03d6383
Compare
03d6383 to
ae582f9
Compare
8101956 to
8eb7360
Compare
e105504 to
ea52486
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Changes recommended
The staging script references a non-existent Gradle task path and the resume logic can skip re-running the final evidence audit, which can allow stale/invalid evidence to be reported as passing.
Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.
Review details
- Files reviewed: 1/4 changed files
- Comments generated: 0 new
- Review effort level: Lite
ea52486 to
ad83f3e
Compare
ad83f3e to
d2d1797
Compare
d2d1797 to
742c8cc
Compare
742c8cc to
4c7974d
Compare
4c7974d to
c1a2eed
Compare
Build and verify the candidate, stage local wrapper artifacts, run the selected suites and retain command evidence. Support supplied archives without local restaging. Audit the in-memory result before writing success. The auditor and its negative tests now precede this PR in #572. Complex orchestration is Python, with small Bash wrappers.
Verification and release boundary
The latest clean-source mixed migration and process-evidence audit pass locally. The current wrapper suite passes 132 tests, with unchanged Kafka dependencies before and after the run. The reorganized Python suite passes 65 tests. These results apply to the complete candidate stack, not every intermediate commit. Focused tests are included with the relevant layers.
The final requirement audit and remote CI review remain open. Published artifact qualification, live production state, the client/tool floor, the deployed ZooKeeper server, capacity limits and named security/release approvals remain release gates. Do not deploy an intermediate stack commit.