Skip to content

fix: verify Linear publication receipts - #482

Open
mldangelo-oai wants to merge 7 commits into
mainfrom
mdangelo/codex/verify-publication-receipts
Open

fix: verify Linear publication receipts#482
mldangelo-oai wants to merge 7 commits into
mainfrom
mdangelo/codex/verify-publication-receipts

Conversation

@mldangelo-oai

@mldangelo-oai mldangelo-oai commented Aug 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

Keep Linear publication receipts accurate without losing track of issues that may already exist.

Changes

  • Share prepared Linear creation arguments between publishing and receipt verification.
  • Verify the recorded destination, content, priority, and create-only argument shape.
  • Preserve independently verified successes in local history and partial receipts.
  • Retain completed mutation evidence under an exclusive host-chosen private filename without replacing existing files.
  • Mark indeterminate outcomes explicitly in receipts and include the actual recovery paths.
  • Save the initial indeterminate receipt before history persistence, then retain the same context across preservation, database, cancellation, and receipt failures.
  • Write auxiliary event files only when recovery is needed and after required verified persistence has settled; remove a partial file only when the current attempt created it.
  • Route final receipt-recovery diagnostics through the existing credential-safe error formatter.
  • Reconcile unfamiliar responses, incomplete handoffs, duplicate claims, and verified event identities through the existing recovery path.
  • Keep optional recovery-write failures from discarding verified results. No automatic retry or remote readback is added.

Testing

  • Final local head df6e4c4de65201bb54f5ee9f7fc770de914c655b: error-formatting, publication-events, publisher, and SQLite-backed publication integration tests passed, 94 tests and 0 failures.
  • The complete SDK suite passed on the same head with Bun 1.3.14 and randomized seed 12345: 1,311 passed, 11 expected skips, and 0 failures across 63 files.
  • pnpm run types, pnpm run format, and git diff --check passed on that head.
  • The local native-review gate completed on the same head with three passes and an independently verified clean result.
  • Pushed-head standard, cross-platform, and package CI and repository-supported reviews remain required.
  • Tests use synthetic publications and mocked external services. No real issues were created.

Risk and rollout

The follow-up changes recovery storage and outcome reporting, not the accepted-creation or salvage rules. Determinate success does not allocate a recovery-event copy. Indeterminate runs may retain an initial status receipt followed by a final partial receipt; the initial receipt does not claim creations that have not yet reached local history. The final error-display correction reuses the existing redactor and leaves receipt, history, reconciliation, and cancellation behavior unchanged. Database schema, credential handling, and default create-new-issues behavior are unchanged. Local native review and randomized validation are complete; fresh pushed-head CI and reviews remain required before merge.

Public disclosure review

Newly authored material was reviewed for public disclosure. Existing automated review comments contain access-restricted report references; maintainer cleanup remains outstanding.

  • No customer, partner, prospect, or user identities, data, or identifying details are included.
  • No credentials, personal data, private source, scan findings, or nonpublic links or tickets are included.
  • I reviewed the branch name, title, description, commits, changes, comments, logs, screenshots, attachments, and links for public disclosure.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the bug Something isn't working label Aug 16, 2026
@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

Please review the current head aa3e774.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: aa3e7749ea

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: aa3e7749ea

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".

Comment thread sdk/typescript/src/publish.ts Outdated
Comment thread sdk/typescript/src/publication-events.ts Outdated
@mldangelo-oai
mldangelo-oai marked this pull request as ready for review August 16, 2026 07:21

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: aa3e7749ea

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".

Comment thread sdk/typescript/src/publication-events.ts Outdated
Comment thread sdk/typescript/src/publish.ts Outdated
@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

Please review the updated head 9d4578f. The first two recovery comments are fixed; I am also addressing the later comments about unfamiliar completed results and rejected success-shaped handoffs.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Swish!

Reviewed commit: 9d4578f36b

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".

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 9d4578f36b

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

Please review the current head, 1c1fa6b. The follow-up retains unresolved completed calls and rejected success-shaped handoffs, while preserving independently verified partial results. Focused publication and CLI tests, types, and formatting pass; the full package suite is running.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Keep it up!

Reviewed commit: 1c1fa6bf45

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".

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1c1fa6bf45

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@mldangelo-oai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

Validation-only description update; the code remains at 1c1fa6b. The full and randomized suites each passed 1,304 tests with 11 expected skips, and the fresh installed-package smoke passed. Please retain review on this exact head.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1c1fa6bf45

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Keep them coming!

Reviewed commit: 1c1fa6bf45

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".

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

Please review the current head, df6e4c4de65201bb54f5ee9f7fc770de914c655b.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Delightful!

Reviewed commit: df6e4c4de6

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".

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: df6e4c4de6

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant