feat(miner): add claimIssue and listActiveClaims ledger aliases

[kiannidev]

Summary

• Add foundation-phase claimIssue(repoFullName, issueNumber, note?) and listActiveClaims(repoFullName?) aliases on the claim ledger (module exports + openClaimLedger() instance methods).
• releaseClaim was already present; this completes the A claim-ledger module exposing claimIssue(repoFullName, issueNumber): ClaimEntry, releaseClaim(repoFullName, issueNumber), listActiveClaims(repoFullName?). #3351 API surface without breaking recordClaim / listClaims.
• Regression tests cover repo-scoped active listing, default-store top-level exports, and idempotent re-claim via claimIssue (claimIssue on an already-active claim for the same repo+issue is idempotent (returns the existing entry, does not error or duplicate). #3353).

Closes #3351
Closes #3353

Test plan

• test/unit/miner-claim-ledger.test.ts — A claim-ledger module exposing claimIssue(repoFullName, issueNumber): ClaimEntry, releaseClaim(repoFullName, issueNumber), listActiveClaims(repoFullName?). #3351/claimIssue on an already-active claim for the same repo+issue is idempotent (returns the existing entry, does not error or duplicate). #3353 cases (14 tests total)
• npm run build --workspace @jsonbored/gittensory-miner

Made with Cursor

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-05 21:24:29 UTC}

3 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 62/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This diff adds thin `claimIssue`/`listActiveClaims` convenience wrappers around the existing `recordClaim`/`listClaims` primitives, both as instance methods on the ledger returned by `openClaimLedger()` and as default-store module exports, closing the #3351 API-surface gap. The implementation is correct: `claimIssue` delegates straight to `recordClaim` (inheriting its atomic INSERT...ON CONFLICT idempotency), and `listActiveClaims` just pins `status: 'active'` on `listClaims`, reusing all existing normalization/validation logic rather than duplicating it. The `const ledger = {...}; return ledger;` restructuring to allow the object to self-reference in `claimIssue`/`listActiveClaims` is a small but correct JS pattern change, and the new tests exercise the real idempotent-reclaim and repo-scoped filtering paths rather than fabricating state.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• claim-ledger.js: `claimIssue`/`listActiveClaims` are pure pass-throughs with no added behavior — consider whether this alias layer is worth maintaining long-term versus just documenting `recordClaim`/`listClaims` usage, though this is a style call given the issue explicitly requests the alias.
• test/unit/miner-claim-ledger.test.ts: the new tests don't cover `claimIssue`/`listActiveClaims` rejecting invalid input (e.g., malformed repoFullName) the way the existing 'rejects malformed inputs' test does for `recordClaim`/`listClaims`, though this is low-risk since both delegate straight to already-tested validators.
• claim-ledger.d.ts and claim-ledger.js both look complete and consistent with the JS implementation — no changes needed there.
• If future PRs add more aliases, consider a small JSDoc note on `claimIssue`/`listActiveClaims` clarifying they are pure delegations (already present) so reviewers don't need to re-trace the call chain each time.
• Readiness score is below the configured threshold — Use the readiness panel as advisory maintainer context; the score does not block this PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#3351, #3353
Related work	⚠️ 3 scoped overlaps	Top overlaps are listed below; lower-confidence bulk is hidden.
Change scope	❌ 8/20	High review scope from cached public metadata (2 linked issues).
Validation posture	❌ 5/25	Preflight is holding this PR: the review lane is unavailable, so it is not ready for automated review.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 1478 registered-repo PR(s), 770 merged, 48 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	kiannidev; Gittensor profile; 1478 PR(s), 48 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.

Review context

• Author: kiannidev
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: TypeScript, MDX, C++, HTML, Rust
• Official Gittensor activity: 1478 PR(s), 48 issue(s).
• Related work: Items reference the same linked issue claimIssue on an already-active claim for the same repo+issue is idempotent (returns the existing entry, does not error or duplicate). #3353. (issue #3353)
• Related work: Open PR work references issue claimIssue on an already-active claim for the same repo+issue is idempotent (returns the existing entry, does not error or duplicate). #3353. (issue #3353)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 5 meaningful terms. (issue #2291)

Contributor next steps

• Review top overlaps.
• Add a concise scope and risk note.
• Await review-lane availability.
• Refresh registry data or choose a registered active repo.
• Check active issues and PRs before submitting.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by Gittensory, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run Gittensory review

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.13%. Comparing base (a4c4cf0) to head (407eda4).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3640   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.13%   93.13%           
=======================================
  Files         314      314           
  Lines       32002    32002           
  Branches    11723    11723           
=======================================
  Hits        29804    29804           
  Misses       1552     1552           
  Partials      646      646           

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[loopover-orb]

Gittensory approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.