Skip to content

merge queue: checking #525 on main (344657b), stacked on #519 - #586

Closed
mergify[bot] wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
mergify/merge-queue/2746d80b4d
Closed

mergify[bot] wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
mergify/merge-queue/2746d80b4d

Conversation

@mergify

@mergify mergify Bot commented Sep 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🎉 This pull request has been checked successfully and will be merged soon. 🎉

#525 is queued for merge on branch main (344657b).

Stacked behind 1 pull request queued ahead of this batch, not part of it. These checks run on a tip that also carries its commits, so a failure here can come from it as much as from #525.

Queued ahead of this batch:

This pull request has been created by Mergify to speculatively check the mergeability of #525.
You don't need to do anything. Mergify will close this pull request automatically when it is complete.

Required conditions of queue rule admin-bypass for merge:

  • check-success = lint
  • check-success = test
  • check-success = validate

Required conditions to stay in the queue:

---
checking_base_sha: 18f192280e4c59630b829c785686a5773292b7dc
previous_check_retries: []
previous_failed_batches: []
pull_requests:
  - number: 525
    scopes: []
scopes: []
...

EdbertChan and others added 5 commits September 13, 2026 20:58
…rely agree

The session behind slice (1) ran one command against one container image and
proved that image had no corepack. That was written up as corepack having been
removed from Node 25+, a version-boundary claim no command in the session ever
checked. The output was true and the sentence was wider than the output.

prove-it already covers a missing check and a hedge. It did not cover a check
that ran, came back narrower than the claim, and got filed under the wider
heading anyway -- which is the common case, because the cheap check is always
the reachable instance.

It binds hardest in a correction: restating the original overclaim while
pasting a narrower proof relabels the mistake as a fix, which is what happened
here before the rule existed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011ZqCxSQVpmM9Rx37C7irgf
Change-Id: Ibc32514be641d37277115faf6068e75ea02e0083
…the claim

The skill test coverage gate requires a test change with any rule-shaped
SKILL.md change. The new entailment rule gets a fires_ example, matching how
the subagent-contradiction rule got fires_subagent_contradiction.md.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HQ9TkZeqARxv3e7W7xesYy
Change-Id: Ia60c5c6a87b249bb186b83a5be5b0717603536bd
Tests on the base can no longer fall through to codex/claude/cursor, and
enqueue is pinned to the temporary state folder.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013smxPCr4XeE7R77zVtN1u4
Change-Id: I7b2356d2fda21cbe253900540139827fcc4d8827
@mergify mergify Bot closed this Sep 14, 2026
@mergify
mergify Bot deleted the mergify/merge-queue/2746d80b4d branch September 14, 2026 04:24
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