docs: design bounded hosted live smoke tier - #1195
Open
steipete wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
clawsweeper
Bot
added
rating: 🐚 platinum hermit
Contributor
|
Codex review: found issues before merge. Reviewed August 2, 2026, 3:46 PM ET / 19:46 UTC. ClawSweeper reviewWhat this changesThis PR adds a design document for a bounded hosted live-smoke tier and links it from the existing provider live-smoke guide. Merge readinessKeep this PR open. The design is thoughtfully bounded and adds no executable secret or provider change, but it still embeds repository-specific history, a hard-coded trusted-repository guard, and repository-specific ownership metadata that conflict with Crabbox’s generic documentation policy. A maintainer must also decide whether the proposed paid hosted-smoke policy should become endorsed repository direction. Priority: P3 Review scores
Verification
How this fits togetherCrabbox’s provider live-smoke documentation distinguishes hermetic checks from opt-in provider validation. This proposed tier would later govern protected scheduled or manually dispatched cloud lifecycle checks, including resource cleanup and evidence reporting. flowchart LR
A[Main branch or manual dispatch] --> B[Protected live-smoke environment]
B --> C[Fixed provider allowlist]
C --> D[Create, verify, and destroy resource]
D --> E[Sanitized lifecycle evidence]
F[Independent provider sweeper] --> G[Orphan cleanup result]
Decision needed
Why: The diff is documentation-only, but it specifies a future operational and credential policy that current main deliberately leaves to a separate repository decision; source review cannot determine whether maintainers want to endorse that policy. Before merge
Findings
Agent review detailsSecurityNone. Review metrics
Root-cause clusterRelationship: Members:
Proposal only: this assessment does not dispatch repair, suppress jobs, mutate sibling items, close, or merge anything. Merge-risk optionsMaintainer options:
Technical reviewBest possible solution: Keep the existing hosted-tier boundary until a maintainer sponsors the paid hosted-smoke direction in #944, then merge a provider-neutral design that uses configurable trusted-repository and ownership-identity placeholders. Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue? Not applicable: this documentation-only PR does not activate a hosted workflow, provision a provider resource, or change current runtime behavior. Is this the best way to solve the issue? No. The document should first use neutral, configurable trusted-repository and ownership examples, and maintainers must decide whether its paid hosted-smoke policy is a direction Crabbox should endorse. Full review comments:
Overall correctness: patch is correct AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant. Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 0171ae2ee19f. LabelsLabel justifications:
EvidenceWhat I checked:
Likely related people:
Rank-up movesOptional improvements that raise the rating; they are not merge blockers.
Rating scale
Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality. Workflow
HistoryReview history (18 earlier review cycles; latest 8 shown)
|
8 tasks
clawsweeper
Bot
added
rating: 🦐 gold shrimp
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
live-smokeprotected-environment boundary, schedule/manual-only triggers, main-only checkout guards, least-privilege provisioning and sweeper credentials, rotation policy, and the required-reviewer tradeoff for scheduled reconciliationThis is the design-only tier-two follow-up for #944. It builds on the hermetic lifecycle gate from #948, the secretless hosted end-to-end tier from #981, and the provider-specific live-test documentation work in #979.
Verification
No live provider proof applies: this is a documentation-only proposal, deliberately adds no active workflow, and performs no provider mutation. The generated
dist/docs-siteartifact was removed after validation.Security and activation
No repository or environment secret is added or referenced by executable code. The proposal keeps all future funded credentials inside the
live-smokeenvironment and blocks activation until dedicated provider projects, hard caps, separately scoped sweepers, destructive canary proof, shape tests, and the maintainer checklist are complete.No changelog entry: documentation-only design proposal, as requested.