Repository navigation
Conversation
…catches it Throwaway commit, not for merge. Deliberately removes the raise in transition_status so test_the_route_refuses_a_blocked_item (llc/tests/test_blocked_by_rule_refuses_at_the_route_15931.py) must go red on CI -- the mutation proof #15931's AC4 asks for, demonstrated by a real CI run rather than argued from reading the diff. A restoring commit follows once this run is recorded.
|
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 |
AutoBot Phase Validation ResultsSystem Maturity: 96.5% Phase Status:PASS Phase 1: Core Infrastructure: 100.0% Recommendations:
|
✅ SSOT Configuration Compliance: Passing🎉 No new hardcoded values of either class — Known backlog in |
Real CI red captured on this PR's first commit, per the coordinator's request for actual mutation proof rather than a reading-based argument: - test_blocked_by_rule_refuses_at_the_route_15931.py::test_the_route_refuses_a_blocked_item expected 409, got 200 (run 34698905758, shard 3/12) - test_work_item_relations.py::test_transition_blocked_to_in_progress_with_active_blocker_raises DID NOT RAISE InvalidTransition (run 34698905758, shard 6/12) Restoring the raise here. Refs #15931
|
Mutation-check complete — evidence posted on #15931 (AC4 ticked). Closing without merging; branch and worktree next. |
Throwaway PR, not for merge. Deliberately removes #15931's blocked-by refusal to get a real CI run showing
test_the_route_refuses_a_blocked_itemred, per the coordinator's request for actual mutation proof rather than a reading-based argument. Will be closed (not merged) once the run is recorded, and a restoring commit follows this one on the same branch before that.Refs #15931