fix(governance): separate observed workflow evidence from target policy - #412
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 56 minutes Limit details: You’ve used all 1 included review currently available under your plan. 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?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the 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 for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
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 |
|
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. |
Problem
Live Noema governance currently enforces the organization-owned central Security Scan workflow, while stronger pull-request/review/status/force-push/deletion controls remain target governance under issue #27. The repository audit correctly keeps the stronger target at FAIL, but protected-main evidence did not preserve the exact required-workflow identity as first-class observed evidence in its durable report.
RED → repair lineage
The existing regression sequence separates observed authority from target policy, propagates it into the durable report/summary, and rejects malformed structured identity fields instead of stringifying them into pseudo-authority. The current branch was then non-destructively reconstructed onto protected main after #416 merged; all four unique governance files were preserved exactly.
Current exact evidence
28fb5db67c9193f8cf3a96fb3484ff4d6f8fc18b29547d965fed9450791f8974c8f98882af2c446b32056726784: success32056726744: success32056726756: successThe stronger target-governance result remains FAIL when pull-request/review/status/non-fast-forward/deletion controls are absent; observing central Security Scan does not promote those missing controls to PASS. The live ruleset requires the central Security Scan workflow and does not currently impose a counted-approval rule.
Ownership
This PR changes only Noema audit/test code. It does not mutate central
.github, weaken the live required-workflow rule, or claim desired future governance controls are already live.