fix: reject legacy profile selectors#24059
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
Author
|
@codex review |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
--profilenow selects<name>.config.toml, so the legacyprofileselector should not be reintroduced through config write or MCP tool paths. A matching legacy selector in base user config also needs the same migration guard as a matching legacy[profiles.<name>]table so profile loading fails with one clear migration error instead of mixing the old and new profile models.What
profileselector--profile <name>reject base user config that still selects the same legacyprofile = "<name>"value, alongside the existing matching legacy profile-table guardcodextool fields such asprofileby denying unknown tool-call parameters and exposing that restriction in the generated schemaVerification