ci(actions): reduce pull request runner contention - #663
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Seongho Bae <me@seonghobae.me> Commit-Message-Assisted-by: Codex
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Team Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (7)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (3)
Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughCI 워크플로 세 개의 동시성 정책을 변경하고, CodeQL·Dependency Review·OSV Scanner 워크플로를 삭제했습니다. 정적 저장소 검증 테스트는 새 동시성 정책과 중앙 관리 워크플로 목록을 검사하도록 갱신했습니다. ChangesCI 워크플로 정책 변경
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to CI now cancels superseded pull-request validation runs while preserving non-PR runs and serializing Pages deployments without cancellation. The workflow and validation updates are ready to merge with no identified remaining risk. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Full details: Docstring CoverageExplanation Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 3 functions across 1 files. (3 skipped: 3 unsupported.)
✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1📝 Generate docstrings 💡
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Signed-off-by: Seongho Bae <me@seonghobae.me> Commit-Message-Assisted-by: Codex
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 232daf73ef
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".
Signed-off-by: Seongho Bae <me@seonghobae.me>
Pull request was converted to draft
seonghobae
added
maintenance
priority: medium
ChatGPT Codex Connector
1 participant
Current exact boundary
develop@2c328875e00e86537df3e965170be80532571cad1e35d347ea69d7dcc298e5c35a5d64764b8b5674developCausal workflow repair
This lane removes repository-local CodeQL, dependency-review, and OSV registrations that duplicate organization-required security/SCA ownership, keeps ScopeWeave-specific Server Tests/Fuzz/Pages ownership local, and makes product validation concurrency trigger-aware. Pages uses one stable workflow/repository concurrency group with
cancel-in-progress: false, so deployments serialize instead of allowing an older run to publish after a newer one.The workflow-ownership contract remains fail closed: deleted central-only workflow files are forbidden locally, while product/runtime validation and Pages deployment remain repository-owned.
Review RED -> docs GREEN
Current review found that source ownership changed while
ARCHITECTURE.md,CLAUDE.md, andREADME.mdstill named deleted local SCA workflows as authoritative. That is a valid code-current documentation defect.ac62d97a02cf043d53cf79fc8d5f592077fc0accextendstests/config/test_strix_static_repo_adaptations.pyso the three current architecture/agent/public docs may not name deletedcodeql.yml,dependency-review.yml, orosvscanner.yml, and must identify CodeQL, Dependency Review, OSV, andContextualWisdomLab/.githubownership.6e967af3fa76f2cfe1ec5adc5ed68dae8f14e58c,03e954f953a233b82d32ed4b03790157d3730886, and final1e35d347ea69d7dcc298e5c35a5d64764b8b5674updateARCHITECTURE.md,CLAUDE.md, andREADME.mdto the same ownership model. The docs now describe repository-local Server Tests/Fuzz/Pages separately from central OpenCode/Strix/PR scheduler/CodeQL/Dependency Review/OSV/Security Scan.No product behavior, release artifact, branch protection, required-check threshold, or scanner success condition is weakened by the documentation repair.
Exact-head evidence
Fresh pull-request workflow materialization exists on
1e35d347...:33895832225: queued33895832019: queued33895832117: queued33895831834: queued33895831996: queuedQueued is non-passing. Keep Draft until one unchanged exact head has terminal product/security/SAST/CodeQL/governance evidence, zero valid unresolved findings, and then-live review/protection requirements. Do not use predecessor results, no-op retriggers, self-approval, administrator bypass, force-push, destructive rebase, or gate weakening.