Repository navigation
fix(ci): keep the drift-checked SLM agent mirror out of the duplication scan (#16401) - #16402
Conversation
|
Important
This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars. ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Advanced Run ID: Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
✅ SSOT Configuration Compliance: Passing🎉 No new hardcoded values of either class — Known backlog in |
|
Measured SLM scope with the mirror excluded: duplication-guard run That's under the old pin by 1784 lines, so the exclusion took. A follow-up commit sets |
… now that the mirror is excluded (#16401)
|
Content review: approve. Correct fix and correctly scoped exclusion:
closingIssuesReferences=[16401], matches its own |
Closes #16401.
Single-issue rationale: this unblocks base's duplication-guard for every SLM agent change. It's the ignore change plus a test, and the pin follows from this PR's own CI measurement.
Thinking Path
autobot-slm-backend/ansible/roles/slm_agent/files/slm/agent/), whichdetect_agent_code_drift_test.pyrequires to be byte-identical. So every agent change adds clones and trips the absolute pin, and it always will.What Changed
.github/workflows/duplication-guard.yml: the SLM scope's jscpd-ilist gains**/ansible/roles/slm_agent/files/**, citing the drift test.SLM_MAX_DUP_LINESstays at 4729 in this commit. It's an absolute count (ci(duplication-guard): the percentage ratchet fails PRs that delete unique code, so gate on the absolute duplicated-line count #16319) that can only come from a real jscpd run.repo_tests/duplication_guard_excludes_agent_mirror_test.py: it parses the workflow's real-ilist and asserts that the pattern matches the mirror, doesn't match the canonical source, and doesn't widen to a sibling role.docs/developer/RATCHET_BASELINES.md: a scope boundary note.Verification
SLM_MAX_DUP_LINESto that figure, with the run ID recorded beside it as the workflow already does. That figure must be below 4729; otherwise the exclusion didn't take.Model Used
Claude Opus 5 as coordinator; a devops-engineer subagent implemented it.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code