2e8e8aa83b
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/ci Pipeline was successful
tea v0.11.1 defines no --comment/-comment flag on `pr approve` or `pr reject`, so pr-review.sh's Gitea approve/reject paths errored with "flag provided but not defined: -comment" whenever a review body was supplied, breaking the durable formal-review path fleet-wide. Remove --comment from both tea invocations and, when a review body is present, post it via the same verified Gitea comments REST API path the `comment` action already uses (#812) — extracted into a shared gitea_post_verified_comment() helper so all three actions share one write+read-back-verified implementation instead of duplicating it. Extends the existing #812 regression harness (test-pr-review-gitea-comment.sh) with a `tea` stub that rejects unknown flags exactly like real tea v0.11.1, so it fails RED against the pre-fix wrapper and passes GREEN after. Closes #835. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Git provider wrappers
These scripts provide host-aware GitHub and Gitea issue, pull-request, milestone, and CI operations.
Durable review provenance
A successful provider write command—or a wrapper message based only on that command's exit code—is not durable review provenance. Review comments count as durable provenance only after the wrapper reads the created provider record back and verifies that it belongs to the intended repository and pull request and contains the exact submitted body (or verifies the provider-returned record ID).
pr-review.sh therefore fails closed when a Gitea comment cannot be written, its created comment ID cannot be identified, or provider read-back does not match. It reports comment success only after that read-back verification passes.