Skip to content

fix(ci): Fix checkstyle error in lifecycle.test.ts#40417

Closed
JiajunBernoulli wants to merge 1 commit intoopenclaw:mainfrom
JiajunBernoulli:ci/fix-lifecycle-test
Closed

fix(ci): Fix checkstyle error in lifecycle.test.ts#40417
JiajunBernoulli wants to merge 1 commit intoopenclaw:mainfrom
JiajunBernoulli:ci/fix-lifecycle-test

Conversation

@JiajunBernoulli
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@JiajunBernoulli JiajunBernoulli commented Mar 9, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Summary

Describe the problem and fix in 2–5 bullets:

  • Problem:
  • Why it matters:
  • What changed:
  • What did NOT change (scope boundary):

Change Type (select all)

  • Bug fix
  • Feature
  • Refactor
  • Docs
  • Security hardening
  • Chore/infra

Scope (select all touched areas)

  • Gateway / orchestration
  • Skills / tool execution
  • Auth / tokens
  • Memory / storage
  • Integrations
  • API / contracts
  • UI / DX
  • CI/CD / infra

Linked Issue/PR

  • Closes #
  • Related #

User-visible / Behavior Changes

List user-visible changes (including defaults/config).
If none, write None.

Security Impact (required)

  • New permissions/capabilities? (Yes/No)
  • Secrets/tokens handling changed? (Yes/No)
  • New/changed network calls? (Yes/No)
  • Command/tool execution surface changed? (Yes/No)
  • Data access scope changed? (Yes/No)
  • If any Yes, explain risk + mitigation:

Repro + Verification

Environment

  • OS:
  • Runtime/container:
  • Model/provider:
  • Integration/channel (if any):
  • Relevant config (redacted):

Steps

Expected

Actual

Evidence

Attach at least one:

  • Failing test/log before + passing after
  • Trace/log snippets
  • Screenshot/recording
  • Perf numbers (if relevant)

Human Verification (required)

What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:

  • Verified scenarios:
  • Edge cases checked:
  • What you did not verify:

Review Conversations

  • I replied to or resolved every bot review conversation I addressed in this PR.
  • I left unresolved only the conversations that still need reviewer or maintainer judgment.

If a bot review conversation is addressed by this PR, resolve that conversation yourself. Do not leave bot review conversation cleanup for maintainers.

Compatibility / Migration

  • Backward compatible? (Yes/No)
  • Config/env changes? (Yes/No)
  • Migration needed? (Yes/No)
  • If yes, exact upgrade steps:

Failure Recovery (if this breaks)

  • How to disable/revert this change quickly:
  • Files/config to restore:
  • Known bad symptoms reviewers should watch for:

Risks and Mitigations

List only real risks for this PR. Add/remove entries as needed. If none, write None.

  • Risk:
    • Mitigation:

@openclaw-barnacle openclaw-barnacle bot added cli CLI command changes size: XS labels Mar 9, 2026
@greptile-apps
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

greptile-apps bot commented Mar 9, 2026

Greptile Summary

This PR is a purely cosmetic checkstyle fix in lifecycle.test.ts. It reformats the multi-line probeGateway mock declaration so that vi.fn< appears on the same line as the const assignment and the generic type parameters are indented one level less, which satisfies the repo's formatting rules (consistent with adjacent mock declarations in the same file). No logic, type signatures, or test behaviour changed.

Confidence Score: 5/5

  • This PR is safe to merge — it is a single-file, no-logic-change formatting fix.
  • The only change is a whitespace/indentation reformat of a type-annotated mock. The type signature is identical before and after, and no test logic, imports, or runtime behaviour were altered.
  • No files require special attention.

Last reviewed commit: 17d4a11

This was referenced Mar 9, 2026
Closed
Open
@vincentkoc vincentkoc added the r: no-ci-pr Auto-response for CI/test-failure PRs label Mar 20, 2026
@openclaw-barnacle
Copy link
Copy Markdown

openclaw-barnacle bot commented Mar 20, 2026

Please don't make PRs for test failures on main.

The team is aware of those and will handle them directly on the codebase, not only fixing the tests but also investigating what the root cause is. Having to sift through test-fix-PRs (including some that have been out of date for weeks...) on top of that doesn't help. There are already way too many PRs for humans to manage; please don't make the flood worse.

Thank you.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

cli CLI command changes r: no-ci-pr Auto-response for CI/test-failure PRs size: XS

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@JiajunBernoulli @vincentkoc