docs(remediation): D-40 RULED BLOCKING; pre-register type-strict ACs before the fix is pushed
Mos ruled BLOCKING on the exit_code type confusion. Both of us had leaned non-blocking on the
unreachability argument and neither shipped it. The two decisive grounds: the direction is
wrong-ACCEPT (false and 0.0 GRANT the exemption), which is this mission's disqualifying direction and
exactly why RR12 was tolerable; and "Woodpecker is Go with an int type" is structurally the same
incidental-correlate argument RM-61 itself forbade for the signature — you cannot certify the
discriminator against infra-shift and then defend a hole in it with an infra-stability assumption.
Generalised into an RM-02 standing clause, which is the real prize: discriminator and comparison
inputs must be TYPE-STRICT. A comparison that accepts a type it should not is a wrong-ACCEPT hole by
construction; `== 0` matching False and 0.0 is one instance of a class. D-40 is the instance, the
clause is the fix. It sits alongside the D-38 clause (does this gate bind its evidence to its subject).
D-39b banks the roles-swapped half: the author does not adjudicate its own PR's blocker status and
does not move the head to enforce it. Symmetric with D-39 — a seat with a stake in the answer does not
settle the question, and a conservative motive exempts neither direction.
ACs are registered NOW, before coder-mos1 pushes and before any reviewer reads a diff; at registration
the fix exists only as an unpushed local commit I have not read, so there is no diff to retrofit to.
They also state explicitly which cases are genuine RED-FIRST (false, 0.0 — currently wrongly exempting)
and which are only regression guards ("0", null — already blocking), because demanding an impossible
red for the latter two invites weakening something real to manufacture it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
This commit is contained in:
mos-dt-0
co-authored by
Claude Opus 5
Claude Opus 5
parent
249335e515
commit
86cd1a0f46
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
|
||||
# RM-61 / PR #1033 — PRE-REGISTERED ACCEPTANCE CHECKS: `exit_code` TYPE-STRICTNESS (D-40)
|
||||
|
||||
**Registered by:** `mos-remediation` (orchestrator) — **BEFORE the fix was pushed and before any
|
||||
reviewer read a diff.** At registration time the fix existed only as an unpushed local commit
|
||||
(`6e7a336d`) on coder-mos1's machine which **I have not read**. There is therefore no diff for these
|
||||
checks to have been retrofitted to.
|
||||
|
||||
**Subject head:** TBD — binds to the NEW head once coder-mos1 pushes. The prior head
|
||||
`033b2ffb46674b2c0bcc5197273c109b461f62d9` and its review 69 / pipeline #2193 go VOID on that push;
|
||||
that cost was accepted deliberately by Mos's BLOCKING ruling on D-40.
|
||||
|
||||
**Ruling being enforced (Mos, 2026-08-01):** `exit_code` must be accepted ONLY as a real integer.
|
||||
`false`, `0.0`, `"0"`, and `null` must all fail to satisfy the exemption. Wrong-ACCEPT is the
|
||||
disqualifying direction; this hole sits inside the load-bearing discriminator.
|
||||
|
||||
## ⚠ Read this before writing the tests — RED-FIRST HERE IS NOT UNIFORM
|
||||
|
||||
Two of the four near-miss values **already block** at `033b2ffb`. Demanding "all four observed RED
|
||||
first" would be demanding an impossible red for two of them, and the predictable response to an
|
||||
impossible demand is a fudge — weakening something real to manufacture the red. So state it precisely:
|
||||
|
||||
| value | behaviour at `033b2ffb` (pre-fix) | what the new case is |
|
||||
| ------- | --------------------------------- | ------------------------- |
|
||||
| `false` | **WRONGLY EXEMPTS** (exit 0) | **genuine RED-FIRST** |
|
||||
| `0.0` | **WRONGLY EXEMPTS** (exit 0) | **genuine RED-FIRST** |
|
||||
| `"0"` | correctly blocks (exit 1) | **regression guard** only |
|
||||
| `null` | correctly blocks (exit 1) | **regression guard** only |
|
||||
|
||||
Claiming red-first for `"0"` or `null` would be a false claim about your own evidence. Say which is
|
||||
which. **Do not weaken anything to make a green case go red** (D-8).
|
||||
|
||||
## Checks
|
||||
|
||||
| id | check | verdict form |
|
||||
| -------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **TS1** | ★RED-FIRST. `exit_code: false` on the real #2188 record is **observed wrongly exempting at `033b2ffb`** (exit 0, `exempted_steps 1`), then blocks after the fix | pre-fix ⇒0/exempt 1 · post-fix ⇒1/exempt 0 |
|
||||
| **TS2** | ★RED-FIRST. Same for `exit_code: 0.0` | pre-fix ⇒0/exempt 1 · post-fix ⇒1/exempt 0 |
|
||||
| **TS3** | REGRESSION GUARD. `exit_code: "0"` blocked before AND after — state honestly that it was already green | both ⇒1, `exempted_steps 0` |
|
||||
| **TS4** | REGRESSION GUARD. `exit_code: null` blocked before AND after | both ⇒1, `exempted_steps 0` |
|
||||
| **TS5** | ★NOT OVER-TIGHTENED. The genuine artifact — real #2188, real integer `exit_code: 0`, correctly bound head — still passes | ⇒0, `exempted_steps 1`, exactly one `WP-K8S-1000-CI-POSTGRES-TEARDOWN` |
|
||||
| **TS6** | The strictness sits on the value the EXEMPTION rests on, not on a cosmetic sibling. Show the guarded comparison is the one feeding `exemption_applies` | reviewer quotes the line |
|
||||
| **TS7** | `bool` is excluded EXPLICITLY, not incidentally. A bare `isinstance(x, int)` still admits `True`/`False` — verify the `not isinstance(x, bool)` clause exists | ⇒ clause present; `true` also blocks |
|
||||
| **TS8** | Negative control unaffected: a genuine failed step with a real integer non-zero exit still blocks | ⇒1, `exempted_steps 0` |
|
||||
| **TS9** | NO REGRESSION ON THE PRIOR ROUND'S BINDING WORK: mutated record commit ⇒1; `--expect-commit` omitted ⇒2; record `commit` absent ⇒1 | ⇒1 / ⇒2 / ⇒1 |
|
||||
| **TS10** | Signature conjunction NOT widened elsewhere by this fix — `POD_NOT_FOUND` / name / type / state untouched | diff-scoped ⇒ no widening |
|
||||
| **TS11** | Still no fetch / trigger / retry / re-roll / sleep / network | grep ⇒ no call sites |
|
||||
| **TS12** | Full harness passes at the new head; **state the case count** (12 previously, expected 16 — confirm the actual number rather than the expected one) | ⇒0, count stated |
|
||||
|
||||
## Reviewer instruction
|
||||
|
||||
Verdict bound to the NEW head, evidence enumerated per check, CI counts from `pipeline-status.sh -f json`
|
||||
(never default text — it omits `clone`, D-33). If a check is unrunnable, **say so**; never substitute a
|
||||
passing variant.
|
||||
|
||||
**Attack outside this set and report what you find.** Both blockers on this PR so far — the missing
|
||||
commit binding, and this type confusion — were found outside the registered set, by mutating a field
|
||||
nobody had registered a check for. That is now the expectation, not a bonus.
|
||||
|
||||
**Nobody dispatching this review may state a conclusion on an open check here (D-39).** If you are sent
|
||||
an observation, it is an observation; the ruling is yours.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user