Skip to content

chore(contracts): backfill ModelTicketContract for 50 tickets [OMN-8637 wave 30] - #192

Merged
jonahgabriel merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
jonah/omn-8637-backfill-contracts-wave-30
Apr 13, 2026
Merged

jonahgabriel merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
jonah/omn-8637-backfill-contracts-wave-30

Conversation

@jonahgabriel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Backfill of for tickets OMN-8494 - OMN-8571.

Part of OMN-8637: every ticket needs a contract.

  • Generated 50 minimal contracts
  • All validated against schema
  • Keyword-enriched DoD checks (golden chain, coverage, contract file presence)

Wave 30/32

…37 wave 30]

Range: OMN-8494 - OMN-8571
Generated minimal contracts with keyword-enriched DoD checks.
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 12, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@jonahgabriel has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 9 minutes and 7 seconds before requesting another review.

Your organization is not enrolled in usage-based pricing. Contact your admin to enable usage-based pricing to continue reviews beyond the rate limit, or try again in 9 minutes and 7 seconds.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 763102ba-8565-48d3-ac68-4380e0f24ae1

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4395e6b and 052d6d1.

📒 Files selected for processing (50)
  • contracts/OMN-8494.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8495.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8496.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8501.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8502.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8503.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8505.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8506.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8511.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8514.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8515.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8516.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8517.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8518.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8519.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8522.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8523.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8524.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8525.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8526.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8527.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8528.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8529.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8530.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8531.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8534.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8535.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8537.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8538.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8540.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8541.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8542.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8543.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8544.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8545.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8546.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8548.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8550.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8551.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8553.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8554.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8559.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8560.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8561.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8562.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8563.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8564.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8568.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8570.yaml
  • contracts/OMN-8571.yaml
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch jonah/omn-8637-backfill-contracts-wave-30

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

…37 wave 30]

Range: OMN-8494 - OMN-8571
Generated minimal contracts with keyword-enriched DoD checks.
@github-actions
github-actions Bot enabled auto-merge April 12, 2026 23:15
@jonahgabriel
jonahgabriel merged commit c682998 into main Apr 13, 2026
20 checks passed
@jonahgabriel
jonahgabriel deleted the jonah/omn-8637-backfill-contracts-wave-30 branch April 13, 2026 06:49
jonahgabriel added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2026
…urrent contract hash

Appending the omnimarket A3 dod_evidence entries changed the OMN-12775 contract
hash; every receipt under the ticket must pin the current hash or the Receipt
Gate fails with contract_hash_mismatch. Re-pin all four receipts (omnidash #192,
occ-evidence, omnimarket #1113 + tests) to sha256:980da6c1.
jonahgabriel added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 26, 2026
…#7169)

* evidence(OMN-16549): correct pr-192 receipt to real landed squash SHA

Append-only follow-up on occ#7156: a Wave-3 audit found occ#7156 (the OCC
companion) merged 07:07:34Z, 28 minutes AFTER omnibase_compat#192 merged
06:39:30Z, inverting companions-merge-first. The node_occ_companion_compute
autobind that wrote dod-OmniNode-ai-omnibase_compat-pr-192's receipt ran its
probe while #192 was still OPEN, pinning commit_sha to the PR's then-current
head 404e9a59447a7530269604c112a9e79c5fd21727. Squash-merge rewrote history:
that SHA exists as a loose object but is NOT an ancestor of omnibase_compat
origin/dev (verified live via git merge-base --is-ancestor, exit 1). The real
landed identity is squash commit abe9095f3b55e87550e092d5e51f145739405d10
(verified live: IS an ancestor of origin/dev).

Adds dod-compat-pr-192-rebind-abe9095f, superseding ONLY
dod-OmniNode-ai-omnibase_compat-pr-192 -- does not edit its bytes. Two
falsifiable checks: (1) omnibase_compat#192's real merge_commit_sha and
merged_at via gh api, (2) occ#7156's own merged_at, documenting the actual
(inverted) ordering rather than fabricating a compliant one.

Cites: OMN-16549
Evidence-Source: self (this PR)

* evidence(OMN-16549): merge the two rebind checks into one falsifiable probe

Append-only follow-up: dod-compat-pr-192-rebind-abe9095f declared two
checks, but a receipt binds one check_value per item. Merges both gh api
assertions (pr-192's real merge_commit_sha/merged_at, occ#7156's merged_at)
into a single command with && so the receipt has exactly one check_value to
bind to.

Cites: OMN-16549
Evidence-Source: self (this PR)

* evidence(OMN-16549): PASS receipt for pr-192 SHA correction

Real hashes computed via omnibase_core.validation.validator_receipt_gate
(compute_contract_entry_sha256/_prefixed_contract_sha256) against the
committed contract at 7825fff. Both gh api probes re-run live immediately
before writing this receipt (probe_stdout: true/true, exit_code 0).

Cites: OMN-16549
Evidence-Source: self (this PR)

* evidence(OMN-16549): self-bind receipt for occ#7169

Append-only follow-up: adds occ-self-bind-pr-7169 now that this PR's number
is known. Does not touch any prior dod_evidence entry.

Cites: OMN-16549
Evidence-Source: self (this PR)

* evidence(OMN-16549): PASS receipt for occ-self-bind-pr-7169

commit_sha anchored to 2aa8175 (already pushed) per the Receipt Hardening
Gate's remote-reachability requirement (OMN-15461) -- the prior local-only
commit was not yet pushed when this receipt was first written.

Cites: OMN-16549
Evidence-Source: self (this PR)

* evidence(OMN-16549): rename pr-192 receipt by run timestamp

* fix(OMN-16549): revert receipt filename to command.yaml (validator requirement)

An unexplained local commit (4956e6c, "rename pr-192 receipt by run
timestamp") renamed the receipt to a <run_timestamp>.yaml shape, matching
docs/RECEIPT_LOCATIONS.md's stated canonical pattern -- but that doc is
stale relative to the actual code. validator_occ_merge_eligibility.py's
receipt_path resolution (omnibase_core.validation) hardcodes
`{evidence_item_id}/{check_type}.yaml` -- for this entry, check_type is
"command", so it looks for command.yaml specifically, not a
timestamp-named file. The rename broke occ-preflight/eligibility
(MISSING_RECEIPT for dod-compat-pr-192-rebind-abe9095f) and the Receipt
Gate on this same PR, confirmed live in CI run 32959938828/32959938799.
Reverts to command.yaml, matching the ~150-file corpus convention (every
other command-type receipt in drift/dod_receipts/ uses this name).

Cites: OMN-16549
Evidence-Source: self (this PR)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant