You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
No code change this round; the head is unchanged. The brief listed nothing to change, so I watched pull request 36302 until its checks and review bots settled: all 35 checks passed on 3123830, Macroscope approved with no line findings, and CodeRabbit generated no actionable comments (merge risk minimal). The pull request reports mergeable_state clean. CodeRabbit's description check notes that the description's Evidence section is still a placeholder; that is the proof step's to fill in. The change itself is as before: getReviewDiffPreview now applies the 256 MiB untracked budget that only status totals used. Staged deletions are dropped before sizes are counted, files are admitted smallest first, and a preview with omitted files is reported through the existing incomplete-source state (no file list, truncated, bounded patch of what fit). Status totals stay all-or-nothing.
Supersedes #32463. The change is @luis-7654's; their commits are kept.
Reproduction on main
Proposed steps, not executed: 1. Create a disposable Git repository with an initial commit. 2. Modify a tracked text file, create a small untracked ordinary.txt, and create an untracked sparse file with truncate -s 8G large.data on Linux. 3. Add the repository as a T3 Code project, create a thread, and open Changes or Uncommitted. 4. On main, background totals are bounded, but the full review request still introduces large.data into its temporary index before reading statistics and can stall. With this change, large.data is omitted, ordinary edits remain reviewable, and the review displays an omission notice.
Evidence
Create an initially committed repository, modify tracked.txt, add small ordinary.txt and an 8 GiB sparse large.data, create a replay-backed thread, and open Changes. Both runs used fresh synthetic state, Chromium, 1280×800, and the light theme.
Scenario source. Base error details containing the workspace path are masked. The runner returned exit 0: failed on base, passed on head.
Not shown:
File-specific omission identification was not shown: head displays a generic incomplete-preview warning, without naming large.data.
Ordinary files were visible in the review list; their expanded diff contents were not exercised.
Tests
None run locally this round, since nothing changed. CI on 3123830: all 35 checks passed, including the 8 required ones (Test Server shards, Lint, Build and Typecheck).
Not in this change
The original PR's untrackedOmitted contract field and the new omission notices in web DiffPanel and mobile ReviewSheet/reviewModel/useReviewDiffData: new visible wording that is not a certain bug fix; the existing incomplete-preview state covers it.
The original PR's change of the totals error text to 'Untracked files exceed the review input limits.': main's 'Untracked files are too large to count.' is kept.
A per-file size limit (the original PR description mentions 10 MiB per file): only the aggregate 256 MiB budget main already uses is applied.
When an oversized untracked file is selected by itself, its single-file preview comes back empty and marked truncated; the clients' existing per-file size-limit wording for that state was not changed.
The Evidence section of the pull request description is still a placeholder, as CodeRabbit's description check notes; the proof step owns it.
The original PR's untrackedOmitted contract field and web/mobile omission notices remain left out, as in the previous round.
Who did the work
Written by Claude Fable 5.2, in Claude Code
Reviewed by GPT-6.1 Sol, in Codex, and by Claude Opus 5.5, each on its own
Proof captured by GPT-6.1 Sol and checked by Claude Opus 5.5
Review previews put every untracked file into the temporary review index,
so git read all of their bytes; only the status totals had a size budget.
The preview now uses the same 256 MiB budget. Files that do not fit stay
out of the index, smallest files are kept first, and the source is
reported the way an unlistable untracked tree already is: no file list,
marked truncated, with the bounded patch of everything that did fit.
Staged deletions are dropped before sizes are counted, so their worktree
copies cannot spend the budget.
Co-authored-by: luis-7654 <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.2 <[email protected]>
Macroscope's review found this PR approvable — Review previews now exclude untracked files beyond the existing byte budget and explicitly flag partial results. The change limits expensive reads using a temporary index without modifying repository contents.
You can add or adjust custom eligibility rules. Learn more.
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review.
Walkthrough
Untracked review-index preparation now applies a shared 256 MiB limit and reports when it omits files. Review previews handle incomplete indexes, and tests cover status counts and oversized untracked files.
Review-index preparation excludes staged deletions and adds remaining candidates smallest-first within the 256 MiB limit. It returns whether it omitted files.
Incomplete-result handling and tests apps/server/src/vcs/GitVcsDriverCore.ts, apps/server/src/vcs/GitVcsDriverCore.test.ts
Branch totals disallow partial results. Review previews use metadata-only mode only when the untracked index is complete. Tests check status counts and oversized-file preview results.
Review previews now stay bounded when untracked files are large, and they still show tracked changes and the untracked files that fit. The supplied evidence shows no actionable merge risk. The author reports passing server tests and checks.
Pre-merge checks: 3 · 1
Failed checks: 1 inconclusive
Check name
Status
Explanation
Resolution
Description check
The description lacks a complete Problem statement, Scope link, and Verification. The Problem section is missing, and it does not name an issue or explain a bug report. Verification is weak: the autho…
Add a clear Problem statement that names the bug and expected behavior. Link the issue that shows the bug, or explain why no issue is needed. Replace the Evidence placeholder with the captured results, or state what remains unverified. Reco…
Passed checks: 3 passed
Check name
Status
Explanation
Title check
The title names the main change: review diffs no longer read oversized untracked files. The raw summary and objectives confirm that the preview now applies the 256 MiB untracked budget, omits files th…
Linked Issues check
Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check
Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Full details: Title check
Explanation
The title names the main change: review diffs no longer read oversized untracked files. The raw summary and objectives confirm that the preview now applies the 256 MiB untracked budget, omits files that do not fit, and returns a bounded patch. The title uses the repository's conventional commit form and is specific enough for a teammate to understand the primary change.
Full details: Description check
Explanation
The description lacks a complete Problem statement, Scope link, and Verification. The Problem section is missing, and it does not name an issue or explain a bug report. Verification is weak: the author ran no tests this round. The Evidence section is still a placeholder, as the author states. The Evidence table gives before-and-after results, but the description also says the Evidence section is still a placeholder. Other parts are substantive: the Change section explains the 256 MiB budget, staged-deletion handling, and smallest-first admission. The reproduction steps are proposed but not run. The description also contains a mismatch: it says the change covers the review preview, while the raw summary says the status-totals path now uses the same byte cap. The description states that status totals stay all-or-nothing, which is a different behavior from the summary. These gaps are significant but the description is mostly complete.
Resolution
Add a clear Problem statement that names the bug and expected behavior. Link the issue that shows the bug, or explain why no issue is needed. Replace the Evidence placeholder with the captured results, or state what remains unverified. Reconcile the description with the change summary: state whether status totals now use the 256 MiB cap or keep their separate behavior. Give the focused test results for GitVcsDriverCore.test.ts, and say which new tests cover the oversized-file case and the staged-deletion case.
Finishing Touches
Generate unit tests (beta)
Commit to this branch
Create a new PR
Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts
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
size:M30-99 changed lines (additions + deletions).vouch:trustedAuthor is trusted by repo permissions or the VOUCHED list.
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.
github-actions
Bot
added
vouch:trusted
![macroscopeapp[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/900172?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
No code change this round; the head is unchanged. The brief listed nothing to change, so I watched pull request 36302 until its checks and review bots settled: all 35 checks passed on 3123830, Macroscope approved with no line findings, and CodeRabbit generated no actionable comments (merge risk minimal). The pull request reports mergeable_state clean. CodeRabbit's description check notes that the description's Evidence section is still a placeholder; that is the proof step's to fill in. The change itself is as before: getReviewDiffPreview now applies the 256 MiB untracked budget that only status totals used. Staged deletions are dropped before sizes are counted, files are admitted smallest first, and a preview with omitted files is reported through the existing incomplete-source state (no file list, truncated, bounded patch of what fit). Status totals stay all-or-nothing.
Supersedes #32463. The change is @luis-7654's; their commits are kept.
Reproduction on main
Proposed steps, not executed: 1. Create a disposable Git repository with an initial commit. 2. Modify a tracked text file, create a small untracked ordinary.txt, and create an untracked sparse file with
truncate -s 8G large.dataon Linux. 3. Add the repository as a T3 Code project, create a thread, and open Changes or Uncommitted. 4. On main, background totals are bounded, but the full review request still introduces large.data into its temporary index before reading statistics and can stall. With this change, large.data is omitted, ordinary edits remain reviewable, and the review displays an omission notice.Evidence
Create an initially committed repository, modify tracked.txt, add small ordinary.txt and an 8 GiB sparse large.data, create a replay-backed thread, and open Changes. Both runs used fresh synthetic state, Chromium, 1280×800, and the light theme.
Scenario source. Base error details containing the workspace path are masked. The runner returned exit 0: failed on base, passed on head.
Not shown:
Tests
None run locally this round, since nothing changed. CI on 3123830: all 35 checks passed, including the 8 required ones (Test Server shards, Lint, Build and Typecheck).
Not in this change
untrackedOmittedcontract field and the new omission notices in web DiffPanel and mobile ReviewSheet/reviewModel/useReviewDiffData: new visible wording that is not a certain bug fix; the existing incomplete-preview state covers it.untrackedOmittedcontract field and web/mobile omission notices remain left out, as in the previous round.Who did the work
Run by the t3code factory in T3 Code.