Two defects in backlog-burndown "The Promotion Boundary" and its "Assembling the Promotion Body" subsection.
The assembly procedure drops the direct-push hop the section body mandates. The unit's operational-model paragraph says: "What the model adds is a second kind of commit in the same range, a direct push that never had a pull request, whose issues are recoverable only from the commit message itself ... Read both, the pull requests for this run's work and the commit messages for the direct pushes, since reading either alone returns a partial set." The procedure that follows is two hops through pull requests only, opening with "the commits in origin/main..origin/develop are squash merges whose subjects carry the pull request number" and "nothing in the range names an issue directly". Followed literally on an operational repository it produces exactly the partial set the earlier paragraph forbids. Either the absolute is qualified to the release model, or the assembly steps carry the commit-message hop.
The "single round" rationale is falsified inside its own unit. The opening says "Each round ends with at most one develop -> main promotion pull request ... so that one carries a single round rather than accumulating several." Step 1 says "A round in which every group deferred or parked can still owe a promotion pull request, for work an earlier round landed and no promotion has yet carried", and Assembling says deriving from the range "is what covers ... an earlier round's work that no promotion has yet carried". The cadence is one pull request per round; the contents routinely span several. The rationale should be about opening one per round rather than about what one carries.
Two smaller ones in the same unit:
- "A fix landing during the freeze adds its issue to a body already written" presumes the freeze fix has an issue. The only fix the freeze permits is step 4's promotion-PR review fix, which is a finding disposed of by fixing (
pr-review-conduct outcome 1) and carries an issue only in the deferral outcome, so the amend rule's normal case is an empty set.
- "and the two hops still read them" uses a term introduced only later, in "Assembling the Promotion Body".
Raised by the local-strict-review carried-content passes on the pull request that added this skill, and deferred there under that skill's own review-round budget.
Two defects in
backlog-burndown"The Promotion Boundary" and its "Assembling the Promotion Body" subsection.The assembly procedure drops the direct-push hop the section body mandates. The unit's operational-model paragraph says: "What the model adds is a second kind of commit in the same range, a direct push that never had a pull request, whose issues are recoverable only from the commit message itself ... Read both, the pull requests for this run's work and the commit messages for the direct pushes, since reading either alone returns a partial set." The procedure that follows is two hops through pull requests only, opening with "the commits in
origin/main..origin/developare squash merges whose subjects carry the pull request number" and "nothing in the range names an issue directly". Followed literally on an operational repository it produces exactly the partial set the earlier paragraph forbids. Either the absolute is qualified to the release model, or the assembly steps carry the commit-message hop.The "single round" rationale is falsified inside its own unit. The opening says "Each round ends with at most one develop -> main promotion pull request ... so that one carries a single round rather than accumulating several." Step 1 says "A round in which every group deferred or parked can still owe a promotion pull request, for work an earlier round landed and no promotion has yet carried", and Assembling says deriving from the range "is what covers ... an earlier round's work that no promotion has yet carried". The cadence is one pull request per round; the contents routinely span several. The rationale should be about opening one per round rather than about what one carries.
Two smaller ones in the same unit:
pr-review-conductoutcome 1) and carries an issue only in the deferral outcome, so the amend rule's normal case is an empty set.Raised by the local-strict-review carried-content passes on the pull request that added this skill, and deferred there under that skill's own review-round budget.