Repository navigation
docs: drop stamps from pointer records (batch 6b) - #15502
kyle-sexton wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
Plugins: testing,knowledge,code-tidying,disk-hygiene,docs-hygiene. Split from #15475 so the review lanes read the diff whole. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01VcupojQwC9uJAfmSt4EHZm
Codex Review Summary: ✅ CompletedThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 02f51cd5b1
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
…nters The decision tables hold pointers, not stored values, so under contract 6.0.0 they carry the link alone. The probe observation below keeps its recheck line: it stores the registered description string. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01VcupojQwC9uJAfmSt4EHZm
|
claude-security-review reviewed Chunk 1 of 3 (40 files)Security review: chunk 1 of 3 (40 files)I found no security issues in this chunk. I read every hunk of all 40 files. This lane already reviewed an earlier head ( What changed. Every edit is to documentation or comments, matching the pull request description:
None of these files matches a TRUSTED PATHS glob. No Instruction-surface check. I checked every removed line against the instruction-surface lens:
I did not read the instruction exception register ( Identical files. Settled thread. The thread on Embedded text. The PR context and thread text contain no directives aimed at the review lane. Spend. None. Nothing here changes turns, models, schedules or billing. critical-findings: 0 Chunk 2 of 3 (40 files)Security review: chunk 2 of 3 (40 files)I found no security issues in this chunk. I read every hunk of all 40 files. This lane already reviewed an earlier head, so this pass reported blocking findings only (CRITICAL and IMPORTANT). None came up. What changed. Each edit drops an as-of date, a recheck trigger, or an inline "as of …; recheck when …" clause from a pointer record and keeps the anchored link. That matches the pull request description. The files are:
No file in this chunk matches a TRUSTED PATHS glob. No What I checked:
Spend. None. Nothing here changes turns, models, schedules or billing. critical-findings: 0 Chunk 3 of 3 (18 files)Security review: chunk 3 of 3 (18 files)I found no security issues in this chunk. I read every hunk of all 18 files. This was a blocking-only pass, because this lane already reviewed an earlier head. What changed. Every edit removes an as-of date or a recheck trigger from a pointer record in Instruction-surface check. I checked each removed line against the lens by what breaks without it. None of the removed lines forbids, gates or confirms an action:
The instruction exception register was not read in this chunk. I judged the removals by their consequence instead. Settled threads and prior findings. The one settled thread is on a chunk 1 file and raised no security point. The only prior post is the earlier summary, which reported 0 findings, so nothing is restated. Spend. None. Nothing here changes turns, models, schedules or billing. critical-findings: 0 |
|
claude-review reviewed Chunk 1 of 3 (40 files)Code review, chunk 1 of 3 (40 files: code-tidying, disk-hygiene, the first part of docs-hygiene, and the changelog fragment)This review covers blocking findings only. The prior-findings file says this lane already reviewed an earlier head ( I read every hunk of all 40 files in this chunk. Result: no blocking findingsThe whole chunk is docs or comments. It takes the as-of dates and recheck triggers off pointer records and keeps each anchored link. The one script it touches, Nothing in the chunk can fail a build or a check:
What changed since the earlier round
Other notes
Chunk 2 of 3 (40 files)Code review, chunk 2 of 3 (40 files: docs-hygiene
|
Refs: #15468
Summary
Split 6b of #15475, which was too large for the review lanes to read whole
(
MAX_DIFF_BYTES300000 per judgment,.github/workflows/pr-verify.yml). Drops the as-of dateand recheck trigger from pointer records under upstream-drift contract 6.0.0 (#15468): a pointer
keeps its anchored link; a stamp stays only on a recorded number or string copied or measured from
upstream. Scope: testing, knowledge, code-tidying, disk-hygiene, docs-hygiene.
Fix
The same edits #15475 made to these files, applied on current main; files main changed since
that branch's base were applied as 3-way patches so main's newer text stays. Also drops the stray trigger fragment
user-scope keys.left in disk-hygieneskills/clean/reference/safety-model.md, the open review thread on #15475.Verification
scripts/check-changelog-fragments.sh --checkand--check-required origin/mainpass.scripts/sync-shared-copies.sh --check: all registered copies match (run on 7a).check-affectedpassed.Related
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01VcupojQwC9uJAfmSt4EHZm