fix(review): preserve per-repo issue cap when miner global cap is set to off

[JSONbored]

Motivation

• Fix a regression where GLOBAL_CONTRIBUTOR_OPEN_ITEM_CAP_MINER=off caused an early return in the issues processing path, which inadvertently skipped the repository-level contributorOpenIssueCap enforcement for confirmed miners.

Description

• Replace the early-exit behavior in src/queue/processors.ts so the install-wide check is guarded by if (globalCap !== null) { ... } instead of if (globalCap === null) return;, ensuring only the install-wide branch is skipped while the per-repo cap logic still runs.
• Add a regression test in test/unit/queue-3.test.ts titled install-wide contributor open-item cap (#4511): miner cap off still falls through to the per-repo issue cap that simulates a confirmed miner with the miner cap set to "off" and asserts the issue is closed and an audit event is written.
• Changes touch src/queue/processors.ts and test/unit/queue-3.test.ts and keep existing plan/execution flow for install-wide closes.

Testing

• Ran the focused test: npx vitest run test/unit/queue-3.test.ts -t "miner cap off", which passed.
• Ran the file-level suite: npx vitest run test/unit/queue-3.test.ts and observed all tests in that file (including the new regression) passed (130/130).
• Ran static checks via npm run typecheck, which completed with no type errors.

---

Codex Task

[superagent-security]

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.35%. Comparing base (9fa67f5) to head (311ff4f).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5205   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.34%   94.35%           
=======================================
  Files         473      473           
  Lines       39973    39973           
  Branches    14573    14573           
=======================================
+ Hits        37712    37715    +3     
  Misses       1585     1585           
+ Partials      676      673    -3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	46.34% <14.28%> (-0.13%)	⬇️
shard-2	34.41% <14.28%> (-0.14%)	⬇️
shard-3	30.80% <0.00%> (-0.15%)	⬇️
shard-4	33.28% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
shard-5	33.52% <0.00%> (-0.17%)	⬇️
shard-6	45.18% <100.00%> (+0.32%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/queue/processors.ts	95.61% <100.00%> (+0.10%)	⬆️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-12 09:52:11 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · readiness 93/100 · CI green · unstable

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

Review summary
This fixes a real regression: the prior `if (globalCap === null) return;` exited the entire enclosing block for issues, skipping the per-repo `contributorOpenIssueCap` enforcement whenever the miner global cap env var was set to 'off'. The new `if (globalCap !== null) { ... return; }` correctly scopes the early-return to only the install-wide branch, letting execution fall through to per-repo cap logic when the global cap is disabled. The added regression test simulates a confirmed miner with the cap off and two existing issues plus a third, asserting the third is closed via the repo-level cap and an audit event is recorded, which matches the described bug and fix.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• test/unit/queue-3.test.ts:4992 stubs a githubId/token value in the mocked miners response that a secret scanner flagged as a generic_secret_assignment — worth confirming it's just test fixture data and not an accidentally committed real credential.
• codecov/patch is at 85.71% (target 99%), so some of the moved lines in the new `if (globalCap !== null)` block likely lack branch coverage beyond the single new test case — consider a test where per-repo cap is also not exceeded (miner cap off, contributor under repo cap) to cover that fall-through path.
• Add a companion test asserting that when the miner global cap is 'off' AND the contributor is under the per-repo cap, no close happens, to cover the negative branch alongside the existing regression test.
• Double check the flagged line in test/unit/queue-3.test.ts:4992 isn't a real leaked token before merging.
• test/unit/queue-3.test.ts:4996 uses a catch-all `Response.json({})` fetch fallback, which can mask an unexpected API call in this regression instead of failing loudly.

Concerns raised — review before merging

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 2 blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 45 registered-repo PR(s), 37 merged, 409 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 45 PR(s), 409 issue(s).
Gate result	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor — Code changes are accompanied by test evidence.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 45 PR(s), 409 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Explain no-issue PR.
• Link the issue being solved, or explicitly explain why this is a no-issue PR.

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.

[BETA] Chat with Gittensory

Ask Gittensory a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @gittensory ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @gittensory chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @gittensory mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically -- no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://gittensory.aethereal.dev/docs/gittensory-commands

_{🟩 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