Repository navigation
evidence(OMN-14285): supersede next market receipt hashes - #3902
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy. Next review available in: 55 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: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (14)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdded two YAML supersede evidence receipts for OMN-14285 and OMN-14326. Each preserves the original command receipt while recording replacement verification metadata, execution results, and an updated ChangesSupersede evidence receipts
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In
`@drift/dod_receipts/OMN-14285/dod-1706-head-55f3c5ae/command.supersede.0001.yaml`:
- Line 42: Align the receipt’s hash field with the hardening contract: update
the receipt, ModelDodReceipt parsing/validation, and check_receipt_hardening.py
so the intended replacement hash semantics use the same contract hash field
consistently. Ensure the checker validates the replacement against the
whole-file contract hash, then rerun both validators.
In
`@drift/dod_receipts/OMN-14326/dod-1707-head-e1bcd7f6/command.supersede.0001.yaml`:
- Line 44: The supersession receipt uses contract_entry_sha256 while
check_receipt_hardening.py expects replacement.contract_sha256. Update the
receipt field, its corresponding Pydantic model, and validator logic to
consistently use the whole-file contract hash, then verify the hardening check
accepts the replacement.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 48e42fb7-423f-4573-b916-5e234094f27b
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
drift/dod_receipts/OMN-14285/dod-1706-head-55f3c5ae/command.supersede.0001.yamldrift/dod_receipts/OMN-14326/dod-1707-head-e1bcd7f6/command.supersede.0001.yaml
| with inventory count 353.' | ||
| exit_code: 0 | ||
| branch: jonah/omn-14285-rsd1-occ-companion-compute | ||
| contract_entry_sha256: sha256:9e44ff071c822235bfbad99eb43a43d5ae38d5e2282e263bc57a58b71d4bb28d |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗄️ Data Integrity & Integration | 🔴 Critical | 🏗️ Heavy lift
Align the replacement hash with the receipt hardening contract.
The supplied check_receipt_hardening.py parses replacement as ModelDodReceipt and validates receipt.contract_sha256 against the whole-file contract hash. This receipt provides only contract_entry_sha256, so the supersession will not pass the shown gate. Update the receipt, model, and checker consistently for the intended hash semantics, then rerun both validators.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In
`@drift/dod_receipts/OMN-14285/dod-1706-head-55f3c5ae/command.supersede.0001.yaml`
at line 42, Align the receipt’s hash field with the hardening contract: update
the receipt, ModelDodReceipt parsing/validation, and check_receipt_hardening.py
so the intended replacement hash semantics use the same contract hash field
consistently. Ensure the checker validates the replacement against the
whole-file contract hash, then rerun both validators.
| count is 354, covering OMN-14333''s two validator nodes plus OMN-14326''s two analysis nodes.' | ||
| exit_code: 0 | ||
| branch: jonah/omn-14326-ast-analyzer-stub-detector | ||
| contract_entry_sha256: sha256:f25bbad04e11679cbe666db696ea77d6ea687b202fc113b0ae776b8706468689 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗄️ Data Integrity & Integration | 🔴 Critical | 🏗️ Heavy lift
Align the replacement hash with the receipt hardening contract.
The supplied check_receipt_hardening.py consumes replacement.contract_sha256 and compares it with the whole-file contract hash, but this receipt supplies only contract_entry_sha256. Consequently, this supersession will not satisfy the gate. Align the receipt, Pydantic model, and validator before relying on this replacement.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In
`@drift/dod_receipts/OMN-14326/dod-1707-head-e1bcd7f6/command.supersede.0001.yaml`
at line 44, The supersession receipt uses contract_entry_sha256 while
check_receipt_hardening.py expects replacement.contract_sha256. Update the
receipt field, its corresponding Pydantic model, and validator logic to
consistently use the whole-file contract hash, then verify the hardening check
accepts the replacement.
1 participant
Summary
Evidence-Ticket: OMN-14285
Evidence-Ticket: OMN-14326
Validation
Summary by CodeRabbit