Skip to content

task: define an explicit verdict for InferRSI PR reviews #346

Open

Description

@zengchuang-hw

Current state: PR #347, reviewed at 03bef4cc, was merged by @zengchuang-hw at 2026-11-04 09:54:15 UTC as 9dded7ad, now main. The requester corrected the proposed approval token from LGMT to the conventional LGTM spelling so reviewers and integrators use the same exact token. The skill and collaboration guide require LGTM alone on the first non-empty line of an Approve review. The incremental review confirmed the documentation change and asked to synchronize this Issue. Current-head Ready CI passed. Earlier approvals on f27feceb and 55696ce5 were dismissed. At 08:34 UTC, @Dong1017 submitted a fresh APPROVED review on 03bef4cc, citing the synchronized governing decision, both complete files and passing hosted checks. @amy-why-3459 added the second approval on the same head at 09:43 UTC; the dismissed earlier-head reviews are not counted. The post-merge policy-manifest job and declarations succeeded. That merge lane contained the policy-manifest job, not a new full test-suite replay. Implementation is integrated; this Issue remains open and no separate completion/closure decision was found.
Decision needed: The repository acceptance owner records completion acceptance and the Issue's disposition after the reviewed implementation was integrated; this status does not make that acceptance decision.
Next action: The acceptance owner evaluates the integrated skill/guide against the original requirements below. Preserve the LGTM spelling decision and revision-specific review history; no further approval or merge is pending for #347 itself.

Goal and acceptance

  • Provide a discoverable reviewer skill for PRs targeting InferMatrixLab/InferRSI:main.
  • Require a clear PASS or DO NOT PASS conclusion for the assessed revision. An authorized reviewer submits Approve with LGTM alone on the first non-empty line of the same review for PASS, or Request changes with concrete blockers and the expected correction for DO NOT PASS.
  • Explain the current-version and independent-review requirements, the existing two-approval gate, and the distinction between a prepared verdict and a submitted review.

Scope and authorization

The requester authorized preparing and proposing the skill in this session. Delivery covers a repository-local agent skill and its link from the collaboration guide. Repository acceptance and closure remain with the authorized acceptance owner. This slice documents the current ruleset and the review-body convention. Automating body validation and changing branch protection are outside this delivery.

Inputs and deliverables

Drafted with OpenAI Codex.

Activity

  1. added
    kind:taskBounded delivery task with a delegated slice
    area:processRepo-wide process, governance, privacy and security rules
    on Nov 4, 2026
  2. Dong1017 commented on Nov 4, 2026

    @Dong1017
    Collaborator

    Accepted decision: use the standard, case-sensitive LGTM approval token.

    • The requester explicitly selected LGTM in this maintenance conversation today. This supersedes the earlier intentional-LGMT spelling; the reason is to use the conventional token consistently across the Issue, guide, skill and review bodies.
    • PR docs: require explicit pull request review verdicts #347 now implements that spelling at 03bef4cc. @zengchuang-hw remains the existing contributor; please align this Issue's status/acceptance wording with this recorded decision while preserving the earlier discussion as history.
    • Current-version reviews and required checks still apply. Earlier-head approvals are not carried forward; an approval using the superseded spelling needs the appropriate current-revision refresh before it is counted. This decision grants no merge or Issue-closure action.
    Evidence

    Direct requester choice on 2026-11-04: “统一使用 LGTM,由作者同步修改规范”.

    PR head: 03bef4cc3f1072ba5c2b84f3f058691b2a325239; API base and observed main: 663f3b327998526a13aa31e72ad729025c18983c. This comment records the governing spelling decision; source review, software checks and final Issue acceptance remain separate.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    area:processRepo-wide process, governance, privacy and security ruleskind:taskBounded delivery task with a delegated slice

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions