Update(governance): adopt SpecSync 5 and Trust 1#6
Conversation
|
Warning You have reached your daily quota limit. Please wait up to 24 hours and I will start processing your requests again! |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 1769a718d6
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ | |||
| { | |||
| "timestamp": 1784002501, | |||
| "commit": "ae9fa7bce2c8725117238978ab012c6dd1423b31", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This accepted CHG-0002 verification is recorded for ae9fa7bce2c8725117238978ab012c6dd1423b31, but the reviewed commit is a8df5c1b7debbe35917935bb86de764057b582e0, and ae9fa7 predates the canonical specs/asa-viewer and CHG-0002 files. In any Trust/SpecSync lifecycle that treats verification.json as the delivery audit trail, the eight REQ-asa-viewer-* requirements are marked as passed without evidence for the final tree, so regenerate this verification after the final files are present.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| Arguments: {{args}} | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Run `specsync change new "$ARGUMENTS" --json`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For Gemini command invocations this prompt exposes the supplied text as {{args}}, but the command tells the agent to run specsync change new "$ARGUMENTS"; unlike the Claude/Cursor templates, $ARGUMENTS is not populated by this Gemini command, so users invoking create-change can create an empty or incorrect SDD change. Substitute the templated arguments in the command text.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| "version": 1, | ||
| "enabled": true, | ||
| "require_change_for_meaningful_files": true, | ||
| "meaningful_paths": [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
With require_change_for_meaningful_files enabled, lifecycle enforcement only requires CHG coverage for paths in this array, but the new canonical contract under specs/asa-viewer/ is not listed. A later PR can therefore edit the spec or requirements without an approved SDD change, bypassing the human-gated lifecycle this commit is adding; include specs/ as a meaningful path.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| [registry] | ||
| name = "swift-asa-viewer" | ||
|
|
||
| [specs] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The commit adds specs/asa-viewer/asa-viewer.spec.md, but the committed registry's [specs] table is empty. Tools and agent workflows that resolve modules through the SpecSync registry will see this repository as having no registered specs, so the new canonical companion is not discoverable there; add an asa-viewer = "specs/asa-viewer/asa-viewer.spec.md" entry.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| The service SHALL fetch Pera public-mainnet pages and details asynchronously, apply list limit 1,000, decode results, and propagate URL, transport, or decoding failures. | ||
|
|
||
| Acceptance Criteria | ||
| - Initial, pagination, and `assets/{id}` routes are preserved. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This acceptance criterion says pagination routes are preserved, but ASAService.fetchAssets replaces components.queryItems with only limit=1000 after accepting a page URL, so any cursor/offset query embedded in Pera's next URL is dropped. That makes the new contract approve pagination behavior the implementation does not provide; either preserve existing query items in the service or narrow this requirement.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
|
|
||
| [lanes.verify] | ||
| description = "Lint, build, and run ASA Viewer unit and live Pera API integration tests" | ||
| steps = ["lint", "build", "test"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The repository policy now points both .trust.toml and .specsync/sdd.json at fledge lanes run verify, but this lane only runs lint/build/test. When a developer runs native verification or specsync change verify, specs can drift or fall below the required coverage while the configured verification command still succeeds; add a specsync check --strict --force --require-coverage 100 task to this lane.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
Sources/andTests/unchanged; this PR contains governance, specification, and workflow configuration onlySDD Review
Test Plan
specsync check --strict --force --require-coverage 100specsync agents statusreports Claude, Cursor, Codex, and Gemini installedfledge plugins run trust doctor --jsonfledge plugins run trust verify --range origin/main..HEADpasses1769a718d6d9393c354c286fe49ccfc3280501eb