fix: §8 豁免定性勘误——已回填破玻璃直推（ADR-0017），非初始建仓导入

[randypanding]

改了什么

• governance/expected-state.json：direct_push_exemptions.comment 从"初始建仓导入（彼时仓库与 gate/PR 机制尚不存在）"改为"已经 ADR 追认回填的破玻璃直推（事件定性见 ADR-0017）"
• governance/drift-check.sh §8：豁免命中输出行同步改口径（"初始建仓导入"→"已回填破玻璃直推（ADR-0017）"），注释引用 ADR-0017

为什么

#56 登记豁免时将 9b056b3/416f5f5 定性为"初始建仓导入"——经 compare API diff 复核，该定性不成立：

• .github 仓自 2026-08-18 02:58 即存在，PR 流程全程运转（feat: cloudbird-agent App 令牌交换脚本与一键创建页 #1-feat: 红队修复批次——gate 硬化、每日漂移+自动关闭、apply loud-failure、App 名统一（ADR-0013） #19 已合并；两次直推的父提交 f3974a6 正是 feat: 红队修复批次——gate 硬化、每日漂移+自动关闭、apply loud-failure、App 名统一（ADR-0013） #19 的合并提交，发生于其后 4 小时）；
• f3974a6...9b056b3a 净变更 = .trae-html-share-packages/scripts/create-cloudbird-agent-app.html.zip（Trae IDE 分享产物）+ agent-registry gitlink（mode 160000 误提交）；9b056b3a...416f5f5 仅改 gitlink SHA——无任何治理树内容；
• 正确定性：破玻璃误直推（IDE 产物连带提交），已按 ADR-0006 三件套回填（ADR-0017 + agent-registry PR [P0] CodeQL 防线可被独立绕过：codeql-gate 独立于 main-protection #23）。

定性修正关乎审计语义："初始建仓导入"暗示结构性豁免先例（未来建仓可援引），"已回填破玻璃"才准确表达豁免语义=个案经 ADR 追认，不可泛化援引。豁免机制本身（逐完整 SHA + ADR 背书）不变。

怎么验证

• 本地 drift-check 全绿：豁免命中行输出新口径，四仓 no-direct-push 通过，§10 对窗口内新合并 PR（含引用 ADR-0017 的 AR#23）实体性校验通过
• bash -n + jq -e 通过
• diff 证据来自 compare API（f3974a6...9b056b3 / 9b056b3...416f5f5），与 ADR-0017 记录一致

风险 / 回滚

• 无：纯注释与输出文案修正，豁免逻辑（grep -qF 全 SHA 匹配）不变

ADR: ADR-0017（事件定性）；ADR: ADR-0016（豁免机制，附录勘误见 agent-registry 侧 PR）

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@randypanding, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 20 minutes

Limit details: You’ve used all 3 included reviews currently available.

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits within each organization.

For paid Pro and Pro+ reviews, CodeRabbit uses a developer's included PR review attempts over the past 7 days to set the current hourly allowance. At typical activity levels, the full plan allowance applies. Higher sustained activity can lower the allowance until earlier attempts leave the 7-day window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: ca24bff4-f167-45d6-8447-7d1a3cab121e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between bf1deec and 19bce49.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• governance/drift-check.sh
• governance/expected-state.json

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[qodo-code-review]

PR Summary by Qodo

Correct §8 direct-push exemption rationale

🐞 Bug fix 📝 Documentation 🕐 Less than 10 minutes

AI Description

• Corrects §8 exemptions to identify ADR-ratified break-glass pushes, not repository initialization.
• Aligns drift-check audit output and governance metadata with ADR-0017 evidence.
• Preserves full-SHA exemption matching and ADR-backed approval requirements.

Diagram

graph TD
  A["ADR-0017"] -->|event rationale| E["Expected state"] -->|full SHA exemptions| C["Drift check"] -->|matched commit| O["Audit output"]

Loading

High-Level Assessment

The synchronized metadata and output correction is the optimal approach. Changing the exemption mechanism was considered unnecessary because the evidence invalidates only the historical classification, while full-SHA matching and ADR-backed approval remain appropriate.

Files changed (2) +5 / -4

Bug fix (1) +4 / -3

drift-check.shCorrect exempt direct-push audit wording +4/-3

Correct exempt direct-push audit wording

• Reclassifies exemption matches as ADR-0017-backed break-glass direct pushes rather than initial repository imports. Comments now distinguish the incident rationale from the unchanged ADR-0016 exemption mechanism.

governance/drift-check.sh

Documentation (1) +1 / -1

expected-state.jsonCorrect direct-push exemption rationale +1/-1

Correct direct-push exemption rationale

• Replaces the inaccurate repository-initialization explanation with the ADR-0017 incident classification and supporting diff evidence. It clarifies that exemptions remain individually registered by full SHA and require ADR backing.

governance/expected-state.json

[qodo-code-review]

Code Review by Qodo

🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📎 Requirement gaps (0)

Great, no issues found!

Qodo reviewed your code and found no material issues that require review

Tip of the day

💡 Did you know, you can show, collapse, or hide each part of a finding: code, evidence, and all

More tips ↗ | Customize Qodo ↗ | Qodo docs ↗