fix(memory-wiki): honor durable: true frontmatter in stale pages report#94507
Closed
chenweicong736 wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
fix(memory-wiki): honor durable: true frontmatter in stale pages report#94507chenweicong736 wants to merge 1 commit into
chenweicong736 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
The Stale Pages report previously flagged every non-report page whose updatedAt was older than 30 days, including intentionally durable references such as concept and synthesis pages. Bridge-mode vaults typically have many such pages, drowning out real staleness signal. This change adds a strict boolean `durable` frontmatter marker. Pages with `durable: true` are excluded from the stale-pages filter at compile time. The marker is strict (asBoolean only accepts real booleans, not string literals), is opt-in, and does not touch updatedAt, so other freshness signals remain accurate. Lint and agent-digest callers are unaffected; the change is scoped to the dashboard report filter. Fixes openclaw#93485 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <[email protected]>
openclaw-barnacle
Bot
added
docs
This was referenced Jun 20, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The Stale Pages report previously flagged every non-report page whose updatedAt was older than 30 days, including intentionally durable references such as concept and synthesis pages. Bridge-mode vaults typically have many such pages, drowning out real staleness signal.
This change adds a strict boolean
durablefrontmatter marker. Pages withdurable: trueare excluded from the stale-pages filter at compile time. The marker is strict (asBoolean only accepts real booleans, not string literals), is opt-in, and does not touch updatedAt, so other freshness signals remain accurate. Lint and agent-digest callers are unaffected; the change is scoped to the dashboard report filter.Fixes #93485
Summary
What problem does this PR solve?
Why does this matter now?
What is the intended outcome?
What is intentionally out of scope?
What does success look like?
What should reviewers focus on?
Summary guidance
This PR description is the contributor's durable explanation of the change. Write it for human maintainers first; ClawSweeper and Barnacle use the same text to understand intent, proof, risk, and current review state.
Describe the intent and outcome in 2-5 bullets. Avoid restating the diff; reviewers and bots can read the changed files.
If this PR fixes a plugin beta-release blocker, title it
fix(<plugin-id>): beta blocker - <summary>and link the matchingBeta blocker: <plugin-name> - <summary>issue labeledbeta-blocker. Contributors cannot label PRs, so the title is the PR-side signal for maintainers and automation.Linked context
Which issue does this close?
Closes #
Which issues, PRs, or discussions are related?
Related #
Was this requested by a maintainer or owner?
Linked context guidance
Link the issue, PR, discussion, maintainer request, or owner request that explains why this PR should exist. Maintainer context helps reviewers and automation distinguish intended work from drive-by churn.
Real behavior proof (required for external PRs)
Real behavior proof guidance
External contributors must show after-fix evidence from a real OpenClaw setup. Unit tests, mocks, lint, typechecks, snapshots, and CI are supplemental only.
Screenshots are encouraged even for CLI, console, text, or log changes. Terminal screenshots, copied live output, redacted runtime logs, recordings, and linked artifacts count.
If your environment cannot produce the ideal proof, explain that under
Proof limitations or environment constraintsso reviewers and ClawSweeper can direct the next step properly.Be mindful of private information like IP addresses, API keys, phone numbers, non-public endpoints, or other private details when providing evidence.
Tests and validation
Which commands did you run?
What regression coverage was added or updated?
What failed before this fix, if known?
If no test was added, why not?
Testing guidance
List focused commands, not every incidental check. CI is useful support, but external PRs still need real behavior proof above when behavior changes.
Risk checklist
Did user-visible behavior change? (
Yes/No)Did config, environment, or migration behavior change? (
Yes/No)Did security, auth, secrets, network, or tool execution behavior change? (
Yes/No)What is the highest-risk area?
How is that risk mitigated?
Risk guidance
Use this for author judgment that is not obvious from the diff. ClawSweeper can see touched files, but it cannot know which behavior you think is risky, why the risk is acceptable, or what mitigation reviewers should verify.
Current review state
What is the next action?
What is still waiting on author, maintainer, CI, or external proof?
Which bot or reviewer comments were addressed?
Review state guidance
Keep this as the durable state for review progress. If useful information appears in comments, fold the current next action or blocker back here so maintainers and ClawSweeper do not need to reconstruct state from comment history.