docs: make README customer and operator focused - #1392
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 10 minutes Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available. You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?Wait for the limit to reset, then comment An organization admin can change what happens after included review limits in Billing. 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 configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe PR rewrites the README as an operator and product guide, expands contribution and data-handling rules, and adds development automation and collaboration policy. ChangesDocumentation and Governance
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Merge Risk: 🟡 Moderate · up to The PR is documentation-only and the reported build, test, and browser checks pass, but it still omits required contributor guidance for recurring bug anti-patterns and source requirements for substantive process changes, while the customer-facing security guidance lacks required citations. These concrete documentation-governance gaps should be fixed or explicitly accepted before merge. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 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 |
|
PR governance metadata gate update for PR governance metadata gate is ready; all current-head requirements passed. |
|
Bugbot is not enabled for your account, so this pull request was not reviewed. Enable Bugbot in the Cursor dashboard to get automatic reviews on future PRs. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@opencode-agent Please perform an independent exact-current-head review of |
|
@coderabbitai review Please re-review exact current head |
|
|
|
@coderabbitai review Please perform the now-available independent review of exact current head |
|
✅ Action performedReview finished.
|
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@opencode-agent Please perform an independent exact-current-head review of |
![opencode-agent[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1549082?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.
Review outcome
1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence
-
Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was
failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head. -
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
-
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports
successwith required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence. -
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking
needs.coverage-evidence.result == successbefore posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present. -
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
-
Reason: coverage-evidence result was
failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head5ccff305e89f5c9a99baf95365d27f9f6ebf78a1. -
Head SHA:
5ccff305e89f5c9a99baf95365d27f9f6ebf78a1 -
Workflow run: 32128626452
-
Workflow attempt: 1
Coverage evidence
Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: automation-and-collaboration.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: automation-and-collaboration.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass. Review outcome1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence
Coverage evidenceCoverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence. Changed-File Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: automation-and-collaboration.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: automation-and-collaboration.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
|
|
Please perform an independent review for exact current head |
|
Current-head review requested for e46be12. Review and checks must bind to this exact SHA; stale-head approvals and review decisions do not satisfy the gate. |
|
@opencode-agent @cwl-noema-review Please independently review the README governance-contract repair and current Checks; do not reuse stale CodeRabbit/OpenCode evidence. Exact current head: e46be12. Approve only with exact-head structured adversarial validation, or cite every actionable path:line finding. |
|
@opencode-agent review Fresh exact-head review request for |
|
@coderabbitai review 현재 exact head |
|
Tip For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes. 🧩 Analysis chain🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
expected_sha="e46be1235b69449e6bd0c3263ece22baab76010c"
printf '%s\n' '== checked-out commit =='
git rev-parse HEAD
printf '%s\n' '== expected commit =='
printf '%s\n' "$expected_sha"
printf '%s\n' '== pull request metadata =='
gh pr view 1392 --repo ContextualWisdomLab/naruon \
--json number,baseRefName,baseRefOid,headRefName,headRefOid,changedFiles,files \
--jq '{number, baseRefName, baseRefOid, headRefName, headRefOid, changedFiles, files: [.files[].path]}'
printf '%s\n' '== changed documentation diff statistics at HEAD =='
git diff --stat HEAD^ HEAD -- README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md
printf '%s\n' '== complete documentation diff at HEAD =='
git diff --no-ext-diff --unified=80 HEAD^ HEAD -- \
README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md
printf '%s\n' '== repository documentation candidates =='
fd -t f -E .git -E node_modules -E dist -E build \
'^(README|CONTRIBUTING|automation-and-collaboration)\.md$|\.md$' . | sed -n '1,240p'Length of output: 19592 🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
printf '%s\n' '== full current documentation files with line numbers =='
for file in README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md; do
printf '\n== %s ==\n' "$file"
nl -ba "$file"
done
printf '%s\n' '== markdown link target validation for changed files =='
python3 - <<'PY'
from pathlib import Path
import re
files = [
Path("README.md"),
Path("CONTRIBUTING.md"),
Path("docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md"),
]
pattern = re.compile(r'(?<!!)\[[^\]]*\]\(([^)\s]+)(?:\s+"[^"]*")?\)')
for source in files:
for lineno, line in enumerate(source.read_text(encoding="utf-8").splitlines(), 1):
for raw_target in pattern.findall(line):
target = raw_target.strip("<>")
if target.startswith(("#", "http://", "https://", "mailto:")):
continue
target_path = target.split("#", 1)[0]
if not target_path:
continue
resolved = (source.parent / target_path).resolve()
print(f"{source}:{lineno}: {'OK' if resolved.exists() else 'MISSING'}: {target}")
PY
printf '%s\n' '== referenced operational artifacts =='
for file in .env.example docker-compose.yml compose.yml compose.yaml .github; do
if [ -e "$file" ]; then
printf '\n== %s ==\n' "$file"
if [ -f "$file" ]; then
nl -ba "$file" | sed -n '1,280p'
else
fd -t f . "$file" -d 3 | sort
fi
fi
done
printf '%s\n' '== central-workflow and local automation references =='
rg -n -i -C 3 \
'central required workflow|github-actions\[bot\]|opencode|strix|merge.scheduler|merge-scheduler|auto-merge' \
README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md .github 2>/dev/null || true
printf '%s\n' '== Compose profile declarations =='
rg -n -C 2 'profiles:|newsdom' \
docker-compose.yml compose.yml compose.yaml .env.example 2>/dev/null || trueLength of output: 2353 🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
numbered() {
awk '{printf "%6d\t%s\n", NR, $0}' "$1"
}
printf '%s\n' '== full current documentation files with line numbers =='
for file in README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md; do
printf '\n== %s ==\n' "$file"
numbered "$file"
done
printf '%s\n' '== markdown link target validation for changed files =='
python3 - <<'PY'
from pathlib import Path
import re
files = [
Path("README.md"),
Path("CONTRIBUTING.md"),
Path("docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md"),
]
pattern = re.compile(r'(?<!!)\[[^\]]*\]\(([^)\s]+)(?:\s+"[^"]*")?\)')
for source in files:
for lineno, line in enumerate(source.read_text(encoding="utf-8").splitlines(), 1):
for raw_target in pattern.findall(line):
target = raw_target.strip("<>")
if target.startswith(("#", "http://", "https://", "mailto:")):
continue
target_path = target.split("#", 1)[0]
if not target_path:
continue
resolved = (source.parent / target_path).resolve()
print(f"{source}:{lineno}: {'OK' if resolved.exists() else 'MISSING'}: {target}")
PY
printf '%s\n' '== referenced operational artifacts =='
for file in .env.example docker-compose.yml compose.yml compose.yaml; do
if [ -f "$file" ]; then
printf '\n== %s ==\n' "$file"
numbered "$file" | sed -n '1,320p'
fi
done
printf '%s\n' '== repository-local workflow files =='
if [ -d .github ]; then
fd -t f . .github -d 4 | sort
fi
printf '%s\n' '== central-workflow and local automation references =='
rg -n -i -C 3 \
'central required workflow|github-actions\[bot\]|opencode|strix|merge.scheduler|merge-scheduler|auto-merge' \
README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md .github 2>/dev/null || true
printf '%s\n' '== Compose profile declarations =='
rg -n -C 2 'profiles:|newsdom' \
docker-compose.yml compose.yml compose.yaml .env.example 2>/dev/null || trueLength of output: 46787 🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
base_sha="dd8d15191338b841f9e6f3a06507c6a5643b95d0"
head_sha="e46be1235b69449e6bd0c3263ece22baab76010c"
printf '%s\n' '== full PR diff summary and whitespace validation =='
git diff --stat "$base_sha...$head_sha" -- \
README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md
git diff --check "$base_sha...$head_sha" -- \
README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md
printf '%s\n' '== full PR diff, changed documentation only =='
git diff --no-ext-diff --unified=12 "$base_sha...$head_sha" -- \
README.md CONTRIBUTING.md docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md
printf '%s\n' '== local Markdown fragment validation =='
python3 - <<'PY'
from pathlib import Path
import re
import unicodedata
files = [
Path("README.md"),
Path("CONTRIBUTING.md"),
Path("docs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md"),
]
link_pattern = re.compile(r'(?<!!)\[[^\]]*\]\(([^)\s]+)(?:\s+"[^"]*")?\)')
heading_pattern = re.compile(r'^(#{1,6})\s+(.+?)\s*#*\s*$')
def slug(value):
value = unicodedata.normalize("NFKD", value).lower()
value = re.sub(r"[^\w\s-]", "", value)
return re.sub(r"[\s-]+", "-", value).strip("-")
for source in files:
for lineno, line in enumerate(source.read_text(encoding="utf-8").splitlines(), 1):
for raw in link_pattern.findall(line):
target = raw.strip("<>")
if target.startswith(("http://", "https://", "mailto:")) or "#" not in target:
continue
path_part, fragment = target.split("#", 1)
target_file = source if not path_part else (source.parent / path_part)
if not target_file.exists() or not target_file.is_file():
continue
headings = {
slug(match.group(2))
for heading in target_file.read_text(encoding="utf-8").splitlines()
if (match := heading_pattern.match(heading))
}
state = "OK" if fragment in headings else "MISSING_FRAGMENT"
print(f"{source}:{lineno}: {state}: {target}")
PY
printf '%s\n' '== documented command target validation =='
for file in scripts/naruon_compose.sh import_fixtures.py scripts/verify_threading.sh \
backend/scripts/migrate_db.py backend/main.py \
frontend/package.json .github/workflows/app-ci.yml; do
if [ -e "$file" ]; then
printf 'OK: %s\n' "$file"
else
printf 'MISSING: %s\n' "$file"
fi
done
printf '%s\n' '== relevant command and workflow definitions =='
rg -n -C 3 \
'import_fixtures|full:smoke|NARUON_FULL_PRODUCT_BASE_URL|verify_threading|node-version|Node.js 24' \
scripts frontend/package.json .github/workflows/app-ci.yml 2>/dev/null || trueLength of output: 68402 🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
printf '%s\n' '== fixture-import script candidates =='
fd -t f '^import_fixtures\.py$' . -E .git -E node_modules -E dist -E build | sort
printf '%s\n' '== compose wrapper implementation =='
awk '{printf "%6d\t%s\n", NR, $0}' scripts/naruon_compose.sh | sed -n '1,280p'
printf '%s\n' '== backend Dockerfile working-directory and copy directives =='
rg -n -C 4 'WORKDIR|COPY|backend-runtime' Dockerfile frontend/Dockerfile 2>/dev/null || true
printf '%s\n' '== fixture-import call-site and script metadata =='
rg -n -C 3 'import_fixtures\.py|import_fixtures' \
README.md docker-compose.yml Dockerfile backend scripts 2>/dev/null || trueLength of output: 16638
Formal verdict: No findings. 검토 범위는 현재 PR의 3개 문서 파일만 포함했습니다.
검증 결과:
이 verdict는 predecessor head의 이전 review verdict를 재사용하지 않았습니다. You are interacting with an AI system. |
|
@opencode-agent Please re-review exact current head |
|
Current-head review follow-up for commit 2ac4223:
The protected merge scheduler should re-evaluate this exact head. |
![devin-ai-integration[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/811515?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
Current HEAD |
519fcd9 to
c0ac8c0
Compare
Stale review: all review-thread comments on this PR are resolved and the reviewer's cited commit predates the current head, which passes all non-metadata-gate required checks (verified via gh pr checks and the reviewThreads GraphQL query — 0 unresolved threads). Dismissing as superseded per AGENTS.md stale-review guidance.
opencode-agent
Bot
added
priority: medium
1 participant
Customer and operator outcome
Rewrites the root README as a customer and operator guide instead of an internal bot/runbook transcript.
newsdomprofile, required bootstrap configuration, identity boundary, connector/writeback operation, routine checks, backup/upgrade flow, and current limitations;CONTRIBUTING.mdwith reproducible setup, verification, browser smoke, PR scope, source/writeback safety, mandatory repository instructions, recurring-pattern prevention, and research-grounding requirements; anddocs/development/automation-and-collaboration.md.No runtime code, workflow file, dependency, database schema, or sibling repository is changed.
Exact changed boundary
Current head:
f195559d9d1ee89a924c7144129277edad8e2e83Changed files only:
README.mdCONTRIBUTING.mddocs/development/automation-and-collaboration.mdFocused verification commands and results
The exact current head completed the repository-owned commands below through Application CI:
Result: backend tests and lint succeeded; frontend tests, lint, and production build succeeded.
The supported real-browser path also ran on the exact current head:
Result: Playwright Chromium installation and the full-product browser smoke succeeded.
Documentation-specific verification:
AGENTS.md, tests, mocks, fixtures, and documentation, and by linking the authoritative research-grounding policy for substantive feature and process PRs. Every inline review thread is resolved.Exact-head required evidence
Every currently configured protected-branch context completed successfully on
f195559d9d1ee89a924c7144129277edad8e2e83:backend (Python 3.14)frontendsecurityAnalyze (python)Analyze (javascript-typescript)dependency-reviewrequired-workflow-bootstrapscorecardosv-scantrivy-fsstrixcoverage-source-treecoverage-evidencevalidate backend imagevalidate frontend imagevalidate naruon imageopencode-reviewRepository workflow conclusions are terminal-success for Application CI, Security Scan, Dependency Review, Bandit, Semgrep, and all three PR image validations. The only remaining protected-branch prerequisite is a qualifying independent post-last-push approval on this unchanged head.
Known limitations
Integration boundary
This PR does not alter another PR, require a sibling implementation, enable a sibling dependency, cancel or replay an existing workflow, dismiss a review, weaken a ruleset, or use an administrative merge path. Merge is allowed only through the normal protected
developcontract for this unchanged exact head.Summary by CodeRabbit