Review-dispatch --ref lookup can hard-fail for a fork-originated PR - #290
Conversation
The @claude agent's own attempt at this fix (workflow run 30110560206) implemented the change but failed to push -- GitHub rejected a GitHub-App token update to .github/workflows/claude-review.yml without the workflows permission. Re-implementing and pushing from a session with adequate credentials, per the same recovery pattern used for #286. Addresses #289: .head.ref has no owner prefix, so for a fork-originated PR it names a branch that doesn't exist in this repo. gh workflow run --ref would fail to resolve it there, hard-failing claude-review.yml's /review dispatch job (no warning fallback on that call site) and degrading the other three claude.yml call sites to a lost dispatch. Each dispatch site now compares the PR's head repo against the base repo and omits --ref for a fork PR, falling back to the pre-#285 wrong-SHA-attribution behavior rather than failing the dispatch.
|
Recovered. The Same recurring failure as the one noted in PR #286's original claim comment — the bot's GitHub App token lacks the Re-implemented from this session (merged latest Generated by Claude Code |
|
👀 Picked up by workflow run #30116307805. Setup runs first; Claude itself responds after that. |
|
The state on this branch already matches what's described: commit The comment that triggered this run (d-morrison's "Recovered..." comment) isn't actually a request — it's a status update from the previous Claude session, and it only tripped this workflow because its body contains the literal substring No code changes are needed; the fix is already committed and pushed, and PR #290 is marked ready for review as described. — posted by @claude post-step from workflow run 💰 Cost: $0.38265269999999996 |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
PR opened by
@claudeto address #289.Triggered by workflow run.
Addresses #289.