open/voyage
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Releases 13 Activity

fix(review): a review with a control that did not run stops a merge

Browse source 
Operator decision 2026-10-06. Before, a WARN that existed only because a
reviewer or engine never reported (e.g. /security-review without an origin
remote) mapped to verdict-gate exit 0, so a review nobody performed in full
was green. Now `missing-reviewer:` / `unattributable-payload` in the JSON
block's allow_blocked_by is exit 2 (could not decide, never green); a WARN
for a MAJOR or a set-aside finding still passes with its reasons. A 1.1
review must carry allow_blocked_by.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Kjell Tore Guttormsen 2026-10-06 20:06:29 +02:00
commit 22e792ce19
Signed by: ktg
SSH key fingerprint: SHA256:JakMjO6FTBBzN0Bhfj9saOoEjaFxlSdYuZQQpM/lF9Q
7 changed files with 72 additions and 14 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
README.md
View file

@ -421,10 +421,14 @@ node lib/review/verdict-gate.mjs <dir>/review.md
# 0 = ALLOW or WARN · 1 = BLOCK · 2 = could not decide (never green)
```
A WARN that exists only because a check did not run is a 2, not a 0: a
review that was not performed in full stops a merge.
No finding is struck for length: only MINOR/SUGGESTION text is trimmed, and
counted; what the coordinator set aside is listed under `## Declined to
Judge`. An engine that could not run (older Claude Code, no `origin` remote)
keeps the review from coming back `ALLOW`, and the summary says why.
keeps the review from coming back `ALLOW` — and from passing the gate — and
the summary says why.
### Modes