docs(evidence): close the duplicate specimen-CTA PR #107/#155 cluster on current state - #203
Conversation
… on current state #107 closed 2026-08-14 (stale duplicate, conflict-locked since 2026-08-11); #155 merged 2026-08-13 as b81281f and is on current main and live. The specimen.html band hunks are byte-identical as the item states, and no open PR carries the fix — the cluster is fully resolved. Co-authored-by: CommandCodeBot <noreply@commandcode.ai>
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your trial has ended. Reactivate Greptile to resume code reviews.
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 7 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. 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: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Free Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Note 🎁 Summarized by CodeRabbit FreeYour organization is on the Free plan. CodeRabbit will generate a high-level summary and a walkthrough for each pull request. For a comprehensive line-by-line review, please upgrade your subscription to CodeRabbit Pro by visiting https://app.coderabbit.ai/login. Comment |
1 participant
Finding
[unreviewed-by-opus] Reconcile the duplicate specimen-CTA PRs #107/#155 — byte-identical specimen.html band hunks.
The cluster is already fully resolved on live GitHub state; no state change was needed:
fix/specimen-conversion-cta-lane1) is the survivor and merged 2026-08-13 as commitb81281f— the fix is on currentorigin/main(git merge-base --is-ancestor b81281f origin/main→ true) and on the live site.fix/specimen-conversion-cta) was closed 2026-08-14 without merging; its branch was conflict-locked against main since 2026-08-11 (per fix(public): add in-content conversion CTA to the /specimen proof page #155's supersession note).gh pr list --state open.The duplicate claim checks out
Both branches'
public/specimen.htmlhunks are byte-identical: each adds the same.bandblock (+7 lines: h2, four-passes copy,<a class="cta" href="/#start">Request the appraisal</a>, no-guarantees.note). Only the git index lines and hunk context offset differ (#107 cut from an earlier main, #155 from a later one).Verification on current main (head
d981610) and livepublic/specimen.htmllines 134-139 carry the.bandCTA block between the report and the footer; homepage routes "Read the specimen" to/specimen.scripts/check-site.mjsstatically guards the band, CTA target, note, and >=44px tap target.https://tinystudio.io/specimenservesclass="band", "Request the appraisal", and/#start(verified by fetch today).npm run checkexit 0 andnpm testexit 0 on the current head.Closes the review item as already resolved.