Skip to content

ci: promote the engine baseline on parity alone - #772

Closed
luisleo526 wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
ci/promote-baseline-parity-only
Closed

luisleo526 wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
ci/promote-baseline-parity-only

Conversation

@luisleo526

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

The merge gate now requires pineforge/parity and treats pineforge/verify as advisory, so promote-baseline.yml skipped every engine merge whose head carried no verify status ("pineforge/verify and pineforge/parity must both be success ... skipping").

The engine axis now admits on pineforge/parity success alone; a failed or absent parity still skips, and verify cannot stand in for it. Header comments are updated to match. No test pins the changed lines.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

The merge gate now requires pineforge/parity and treats pineforge/verify
as advisory, so the promotion workflow skipped every engine merge whose
head carried no verify status. Admit on pineforge/parity success alone;
a failed or absent parity still skips.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>

@graphify-labs graphify-labs Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Graphify reviewed this change.

No issues found by static checks — no coupling regressions or blocking issues in the code graph. That is not the same as safe to merge: see what was not checked.

Not checked: tests were not run; no formal proof of the changed code.


Graphify review — findings

Relaxes the engine promote guard so pineforge/parity alone must be success on the PR head, and pineforge/verify is now advisory. If parity isn't green, the workflow still skips promotion with a notice, now worded to name only parity. The header comments and the statuses permission note are updated to match.

No blocking issues surfaced. 1 lower-confidence candidate did not survive cross-model review.

Analysis details — impact, health, verification

Impact & health

Graphify review

Impact — 3 functions depend on the 3 functions this change touches.

Health — grade A; no new coupling hotspots.

Verification — 3 functions in the blast radius were not formally verified this run (proofs are advisory here).

Gate & verification

graphify gate

PASS — objectively clean (no health regressions, tests not run — proofs not run this pass (advisory)). Grounded, not self-assessed.

Advisory (not blocking):

  • verification_scope: 3 function(s) in the blast radius were not formally verified this run

Require the complete parity-only head predicate while preserving main-copy,
latest-status, pagination, tree, authorization and credential-order checks.
Add Bash and jq status decisions and workflow mutation controls.
Normalize enclosing parentheses around the exact parity-success expression.
Reject compound and malformed predicates, and cover parity-only, verify-only,
combined-status and missing-status cases plus expression wrapping controls.
luisleo526 added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 7, 2026
Combine six engine pull requests into one change, gated once.

Source pull requests and the heads merged here:
- #774 Add live drawing capacity to the runtime limit vocabulary (99b0bfe)
- #764 Preserve direction in trade size accessors (834333f)
- #765 ci: reduce sanitizer debug info footprint (be68cab)
- #773 Include ABI layout probe in PR smoke (4f31c10)
- #772 ci: promote the engine baseline on parity alone (349418e)
- #759 Write bounded drawing arenas in place and share their slots between checkpoints (cecedc0)

Gate on head b4c316b (tree 1a4b2ea): required CI green; one parity sweep over 7,989 probes with no lost coverage, no band movement and no hard regression; one review of the combined diff. In the post-merge native run on the same tree, every native shard and the thread-sanitizer leg pass; the address-sanitizer legs fail on runner disk space (No space left on device), the same jobs that fail on main.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>
@luisleo526

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Merged as part of #776 (combined change, commit 63f3978), which carries this pull request's head unchanged and passed the full gate once. Closing this one; the branch is kept.

@luisleo526 luisleo526 closed this Nov 7, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant