Skip to content

failing-main#97

Open
AndreasAbdi wants to merge 6 commits into
mainfrom
failing-main
Open

failing-main#97
AndreasAbdi wants to merge 6 commits into
mainfrom
failing-main

Conversation

@AndreasAbdi

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

{
"project": "Model Reference — Restore Green Main CI",
"branchName": "failing-main",
"description": "Restore a green main branch by fixing the currently failing CI gates, keeping the existing CI contract aligned across local commands and GitHub Actions, and preserving customer-visible site behavior.",
"context": {
"customerAsk": "Main CI is currently failing. Fix the failure and make sure things are passing again.",
"problem": "The repository's enforced CI surface is red. As observed locally on June 19, 2026, make ci currently stops at lint because of committed import/format/unused-symbol drift, and make coverage fails three verify-phase-1-route-search-ux script tests only during the coverage subprocess path. Until those gates are repaired and proven green through the hosted workflow, reviewers cannot trust main branch health.",
"solution": "Fix the concrete lint violations already present in the tree, repair the coverage-only verifier failures so the coverage subprocess is deterministic, and verify that the existing local CI entrypoints and GitHub Actions workflow return to green without broad CI redesign or customer-facing docs changes."
},
"acceptanceCriteria": [
"make lint exits 0 on the committed tree with no remaining import-order, formatting, or unused-symbol violations.",
"make coverage exits 0 and no longer fails the three verify-phase-1-route-search-ux default-spawn tests during the coverage subprocess path.",
"make ci exits 0 from the repository root using the current gate sequence in Makefile.",
"GitHub Actions CI completes successfully on the existing workflow shape and reports a green aggregate ci status for the repaired branch.",
"The CI repair does not change user-visible docs content, route availability, search results, or production build output except where needed to stabilize the verifier harness.",
"The verifier and coverage fix is backed by direct automated evidence so the same failure mode reappearing would fail CI again.",
"Typecheck, lint, and tests pass."
],
"userStories": [
{
"id": "failing-main-001",
"title": "Remove committed lint drift blocking CI",
"description": "As a maintainer, I want the repository tree to satisfy the committed lint and formatting rules so the first CI gate stops failing on known source drift.",
"acceptanceCriteria": [
"make lint exits 0 on the current branch.",
"The current failing lint issues are resolved without changing unrelated behavior: unused symbols are removed or intentionally renamed, imports are organized, and files match formatter output.",
"No new lint suppressions are added unless a line cannot be made compliant and the suppression explains the exact reason.",
"Typecheck passes",
"Tests pass"
],
"priority": 1,
"passes": true,
"notes": ""
},
{
"id": "failing-main-002",
"title": "Stabilize coverage-mode verifier execution",
"description": "As a CI maintainer, I want the coverage subprocess to exercise the Phase 1 route and search verifier predictably so coverage passes do not fail on default-spawn script tests that are green outside coverage mode.",
"acceptanceCriteria": [
"make coverage exits 0 on the current branch.",
"The three currently failing verify-phase-1-route-search-ux script tests pass during the coverage subprocess path.",
"The repair keeps the intended observable behavior of the verifier script intact: success still returns exit code 0 with the success summary, missing .next still returns exit code 1 with NEXT_BUILD_REQUIRED_MESSAGE, and startup failures still return exit code 1 with readiness diagnostics.",
"Any coverage-mode branching is explicit, minimal, and documented in the harness or test code so reviewers can see why the subprocess behavior is stable.",
"Typecheck passes",
"Tests pass"
],
"priority": 2,
"passes": true,
"notes": ""
},
{
"id": "failing-main-003",
"title": "Prove local and GitHub Actions CI return to green",
"description": "As a reviewer, I want the repaired branch to demonstrate green status through the same local and remote CI entrypoints used for merges so I can trust that main is healthy again.",
"acceptanceCriteria": [
"make ci exits 0 using the existing Makefile contract.",
"The GitHub Actions CI workflow completes successfully for the branch without removing existing required jobs unless they are proven redundant to the restored contract and intentionally updated.",
"Any CI contract updates remain aligned across Makefile, package scripts, and workflow commands so local reproduction matches the hosted checks.",
"The final implementation notes capture which gates were failing before the repair and which commands now prove the branch is green.",
"Typecheck passes",
"Tests pass"
],
"priority": 3,
"passes": true,
"notes": ""
}
]
}

@AndreasAbdi

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Follow-up for mergeability: after the first PR push, GitHub Actions test failed on a CI-only static search client flake in src/tests/search/search-api.test.ts. I isolated each oramaStaticClient regression case behind a distinct bootstrap URL so cached static bootstrap state cannot leak across tests while globalThis.fetch changes between scenarios. I reran the affected local test gate before pushing commit b072614.

@AndreasAbdi

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Second follow-up for mergeability: the first retry still failed hosted lint because Biome wanted the new static-client bootstrap URL constants in src/tests/search/search-api.test.ts on single lines. I applied the formatter-compatible form locally, re-ran the targeted lint and search-api test file, and pushed commit 2f1d1cc.

@AndreasAbdi

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Mergeability follow-up for commit 0861ab5:

GitHub Actions test previously failed on docs search static client > orama static client returns non-empty attention results before app-level reranking in src/tests/search/search-api.test.ts.

I hardened those static-client regressions so each scenario gets a per-invocation bootstrap URL instead of reusing a shared from URL. That prevents hidden Orama bootstrap cache reuse across the full suite when globalThis.fetch is mocked.

Local verification on this head:

  • bun test src/tests/search/search-api.test.ts
  • bunx biome check src/tests/search/search-api.test.ts
  • make ci

All three passed locally before push.

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