Conversation
|
CI triage note: the current red checks appear to be inherited from This PR only changes:
Relevant PR-specific checks passed:
Comparison against latest
I am intentionally not broadening this cleanup PR to fix unrelated CI/main breakage. The actual cleanup in this PR is scoped to the advisory |
teknium1
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the focused ty cleanup. The three original source patterns remain on current main, including the optional aiohttp import at plugins/platforms/google_chat/adapter.py:3250 and the heterogeneous PlatformEntry(**defaults) setup at tests/hermes_cli/test_setup_irc.py:19-39.
Problems
- The Google Chat test narrowing only covers the API-failure test. Current main's preceding refresh-success test still dereferences
_gc_mod.service_account.Credentialsattests/gateway/test_google_chat.py:2858,:2859, and:2874, leaving the same potentially-None typing pattern outside this PR's hunk.
Suggested changes
- Apply the same local
service_accountbinding and non-None assertion to that refresh-success test before salvaging this cleanup.
Automated hermes-sweeper review.
54d7258 to
7caeba6
Compare
Summary
mainwhile preserving the original focused typing cleanupsimportlibfor the optionalaiohttpimport in Google Chat standalone send without changing its runtime behaviourservice_accountmodule in both standalone-send credential mock teststydoes not infer a heterogeneous value union forPlatformEntrykeyword argumentsdocs/plans/2026-07-13-001-fix-pr-24210-review-followup-plan.mdVerification
scripts/run_tests.sh tests/gateway/test_google_chat.py tests/hermes_cli/test_setup_irc.py- 168 passedruff check .- passedpython scripts/check-windows-footguns.py --all- passedpython -m compileall -q plugins/platforms/google_chat/adapter.py tests/gateway/test_google_chat.py tests/hermes_cli/test_setup_irc.py- passedorigin/main- no new Ruff issues and 22 fewer ty diagnosticsmain, apart from one timing-sensitive cache invalidation test in unchanged codeAddresses the advisory ty diff reported on #22461: #22461 (comment)