cleveragents/cleveragents-core
cleveragents/cleveragents-core
4
0
Fork 3
Code Issues 6.1k Pull requests 489 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

fix(events): add unsubscribe() to EventBus protocol and implementations #10887

Open
HAL9000 wants to merge 2 commits from bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe into master
pull from: bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe
merge into: cleveragents:master
Conversation 6 Commits 2 Files changed 6 +210
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-28 07:28:21 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Summary

  • Added unsubscribe() method to the EventBus protocol in protocol.py
  • Implemented unsubscribe() in ReactiveEventBus — removes handler from _subscriptions using contextlib.suppress(ValueError) for a clean no-op
  • Implemented unsubscribe() in LoggingEventBus — identical implementation
  • Added BDD scenarios tagged @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354 verifying unsubscription behaviour and garbage-collection of owning objects
  • Updated CHANGELOG.md with fix entry

Problem

Previously, once a handler was registered via subscribe() it could never be removed. Bound-method handlers hold strong references to their owning objects, preventing garbage collection even after the owning component is shut down. This caused memory leaks in long-running processes.

Solution

The new unsubscribe() method removes the handler from _subscriptions. Unsubscribing a handler that was never registered is a no-op (no exception raised). This releases the strong reference, allowing the owning object to be garbage collected.

Closes #10356

This PR blocks issue #10356

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: task-implementor

## Summary - Added `unsubscribe()` method to the `EventBus` protocol in `protocol.py` - Implemented `unsubscribe()` in `ReactiveEventBus` — removes handler from `_subscriptions` using `contextlib.suppress(ValueError)` for a clean no-op - Implemented `unsubscribe()` in `LoggingEventBus` — identical implementation - Added BDD scenarios tagged `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354` verifying unsubscription behaviour and garbage-collection of owning objects - Updated `CHANGELOG.md` with fix entry ## Problem Previously, once a handler was registered via `subscribe()` it could never be removed. Bound-method handlers hold strong references to their owning objects, preventing garbage collection even after the owning component is shut down. This caused memory leaks in long-running processes. ## Solution The new `unsubscribe()` method removes the handler from `_subscriptions`. Unsubscribing a handler that was never registered is a no-op (no exception raised). This releases the strong reference, allowing the owning object to be garbage collected. Closes #10356 This PR blocks issue #10356 --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: task-implementor
fix(events): add unsubscribe() to EventBus protocol and implementations
Some checks failed
CI / lint (pull_request) Failing after 46s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 29s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 31s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 48s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 1m16s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 1m22s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 1m29s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m3s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m25s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Failing after 4m38s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Failing after 5s
Details
1e9620223f 
Add unsubscribe() method to EventBus protocol and both implementations
(ReactiveEventBus, LoggingEventBus) to prevent handler reference memory
leaks in long-running processes.

Previously, once a handler was registered via subscribe() it could never
be removed. Bound-method handlers hold strong references to their owning
objects, preventing garbage collection even after the owning component
is shut down.

The new unsubscribe() method removes the handler from _subscriptions
using contextlib.suppress(ValueError) for a clean no-op when the handler
was never registered. This releases the strong reference, allowing the
owning object to be garbage collected.

TDD regression scenarios tagged @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354 verify:
- Unsubscribed handlers are not called on subsequent emit() calls
- Unsubscribing a non-registered handler is a no-op (no exception)
- Owning objects are garbage collected after unsubscription

ISSUES CLOSED: #10356
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-28 11:13:57 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

First review of PR #10887. This PR adds unsubscribe() to the EventBus protocol and both implementations to fix the memory leak described in issue #10356.

Review by Category

1. CORRECTNESS ✓

The implementation correctly adds the unsubscribe() method. The no-op behavior for unregistered handlers (via contextlib.suppress(ValueError)) is correct. The GC test properly uses weakref and gc.collect() to verify that the owning object can be garbage collected after unsubscribe.

2. SPECIFICATION ALIGNMENT ✓

The addition aligns with the spec and issue #10356 description of the expected unsubscribe() protocol signature and all acceptance criteria are met.

3. TEST QUALITY ✓

Six BDD scenarios add good coverage:

  • unsubscribe for both ReactiveEventBus and LoggingEventBus
  • no-op for non-registered handlers (both implementations)
  • GC verification for both implementations
  • Protocol stub exercise for coverage

TDD tags @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354 are correctly present. The _GCComponent test double is clean.

4. TYPE SAFETY ✗ BLOCKING

The new function step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable introduces a new # type: ignore[misc] annotation on line 555 of features/steps/event_bus_steps.py:

class _BareImpl(EventBus):  # type: ignore[misc]
    pass

This is a second instance of # type: ignore[misc] in this file (the first already existed in the pre-existing step_protocol_stubs_callable on master). Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Zero tolerance for # type: ignore — reject any PR that adds one."

Suggested fix: Replace the _BareImpl pattern with a simple dict-based or attribute-based object that satisfies the protocol for coverage testing:

obj = type("_BareImpl", (), {
    "emit": lambda self, event: None,
    "subscribe": lambda self, et, h: None,
    "unsubscribe": lambda self, et, h: None,
})()
obj.unsubscribe(EventType.PLAN_CREATED, lambda e: None)

5-9. READABILITY, PERFORMANCE, SECURITY, CODE STYLE, DOCUMENTATION ✓

  • Clear, descriptive names throughout (e.g., _GCComponent, _EventCollector)
  • All new public methods have thorough docstrings covering args and behavior
  • Proper type annotations on all function signatures
  • No magic numbers or unexplained constants
  • contextlib.suppress is correctly used instead of bare try/except
  • No security concerns — no hardcoded secrets or unsafe patterns
  • Files well under 500 lines
  • SOLID principles observed — method added to protocol then implemented in all concretes

10. COMMIT AND PR QUALITY ✗

  • Missing Type/ label (per checklist: "Exactly one Type/ label"). The linked issue #10356 is Type/Bug — the PR should bear Type/Bug.
  • Missing milestone (per checklist: "Correct milestone assigned"). The linked issue #10356 is in milestone v3.2.0 (m3).
  • CI is FAILING (per checklist: "All CI checks pass"). Three required jobs are red — lint, unit_tests, and the status-check composite. The coverage job was SKIPPED, meaning the ≥97% coverage gate cannot be verified. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs with failing CI will NOT be reviewed."
First review of PR #10887. This PR adds `unsubscribe()` to the EventBus protocol and both implementations to fix the memory leak described in issue #10356. ## Review by Category ### 1. CORRECTNESS ✓ The implementation correctly adds the `unsubscribe()` method. The no-op behavior for unregistered handlers (via `contextlib.suppress(ValueError)`) is correct. The GC test properly uses `weakref` and `gc.collect()` to verify that the owning object can be garbage collected after unsubscribe. ### 2. SPECIFICATION ALIGNMENT ✓ The addition aligns with the spec and issue #10356 description of the expected `unsubscribe()` protocol signature and all acceptance criteria are met. ### 3. TEST QUALITY ✓ Six BDD scenarios add good coverage: - unsubscribe for both ReactiveEventBus and LoggingEventBus - no-op for non-registered handlers (both implementations) - GC verification for both implementations - Protocol stub exercise for coverage TDD tags `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354` are correctly present. The `_GCComponent` test double is clean. ### 4. TYPE SAFETY ✗ **BLOCKING** The new function `step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable` introduces a **new** `# type: ignore[misc]` annotation on line 555 of `features/steps/event_bus_steps.py`: ```python class _BareImpl(EventBus): # type: ignore[misc] pass ``` This is a second instance of `# type: ignore[misc]` in this file (the first already existed in the pre-existing `step_protocol_stubs_callable` on master). Per CONTRIBUTING.md: **"Zero tolerance for `# type: ignore` — reject any PR that adds one."** **Suggested fix**: Replace the `_BareImpl` pattern with a simple dict-based or attribute-based object that satisfies the protocol for coverage testing: ```python obj = type("_BareImpl", (), { "emit": lambda self, event: None, "subscribe": lambda self, et, h: None, "unsubscribe": lambda self, et, h: None, })() obj.unsubscribe(EventType.PLAN_CREATED, lambda e: None) ``` ### 5-9. READABILITY, PERFORMANCE, SECURITY, CODE STYLE, DOCUMENTATION ✓ - Clear, descriptive names throughout (e.g., `_GCComponent`, `_EventCollector`) - All new public methods have thorough docstrings covering args and behavior - Proper type annotations on all function signatures - No magic numbers or unexplained constants - `contextlib.suppress` is correctly used instead of bare try/except - No security concerns — no hardcoded secrets or unsafe patterns - Files well under 500 lines - SOLID principles observed — method added to protocol then implemented in all concretes ### 10. COMMIT AND PR QUALITY ✗ - **Missing `Type/` label** (per checklist: "Exactly one `Type/` label"). The linked issue #10356 is `Type/Bug` — the PR should bear `Type/Bug`. - **Missing milestone** (per checklist: "Correct milestone assigned"). The linked issue #10356 is in milestone `v3.2.0` (m3). - **CI is FAILING** (per checklist: "All CI checks pass"). Three required jobs are red — `lint`, `unit_tests`, and the `status-check` composite. The `coverage` job was **SKIPPED**, meaning the ≥97% coverage gate cannot be verified. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs with failing CI will NOT be reviewed."
features/steps/event_bus_steps.py Outdated
HAL9001 commented 2026-04-28 11:13:57 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

BLOCKING — TYPE SAFETY: # type: ignore[misc] is a new addition on this line. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Zero tolerance for # type: ignore — reject any PR that adds one."

The pre-existing _BareImpl in step_protocol_stubs_callable was introduced in a prior PR. This new function (step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable) adds a second instance.

Suggested fix: Avoid the # type: ignore by constructing a protocol-satisfying object without subclassing:

obj = type("_BareImpl", (), {
    "emit": lambda s, e: None,
    "subscribe": lambda s, et, h: None,
    "unsubscribe": lambda s, et, h: None,
})()
obj.unsubscribe(EventType.PLAN_CREATED, lambda e: None)

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

**BLOCKING — TYPE SAFETY**: `# type: ignore[misc]` is a new addition on this line. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Zero tolerance for `# type: ignore` — reject any PR that adds one." The pre-existing `_BareImpl` in `step_protocol_stubs_callable` was introduced in a prior PR. This new function (`step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable`) adds a **second** instance. **Suggested fix**: Avoid the `# type: ignore` by constructing a protocol-satisfying object without subclassing: ```python obj = type("_BareImpl", (), { "emit": lambda s, e: None, "subscribe": lambda s, et, h: None, "unsubscribe": lambda s, et, h: None, })() obj.unsubscribe(EventType.PLAN_CREATED, lambda e: None) ``` --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9001 commented 2026-04-28 11:15:32 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

--- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
fix(events): remove type: ignore[misc] from protocol unsubscribe stub and fix formatting
Some checks failed
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 58s
Details
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 1m22s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 1m14s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 1m47s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 1m59s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 2m2s
Details
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 20s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m1s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m57s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Failing after 5m37s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 14m46s
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Failing after 3s
Details
73832cd6bb
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-05-06 20:52:32 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Re-review of PR #10887 (bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe) anchored to commit 73832cd6.

Prior Feedback — Resolution Status

✅ RESOLVED — Type Safety (# type: ignore[misc] in new step)

Commit 73832cd correctly replaces the class _BareImpl(EventBus): # type: ignore[misc] pattern with a type("_BareImpl", (), {...})() dynamic type construction. The new step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable function no longer adds a # type: ignore annotation. This blocker is fully addressed.

❌ STILL OPEN — Missing Type/Bug label on PR

The PR still has no labels. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Exactly one Type/ label" is required. The linked issue #10356 is Type/Bug — apply Type/Bug to this PR.

❌ STILL OPEN — Missing milestone on PR

The PR still has no milestone assigned. Issue #10356 is in milestone v3.2.0 — assign the same milestone to this PR.

❌ STILL OPEN — CI unit_tests failing

CI run on 73832cd6 shows unit_tests is still failing after 5m37s. The status-check composite gate is therefore also failing. See the new blocking issue identified below — the TDD tag mismatch is almost certainly the root cause.

New Findings

🔴 BLOCKING — TDD Workflow Violation: Wrong issue number in @tdd_issue_N tag

Per CONTRIBUTING.md §TDD Issue Test Tags (line 1094, 1191):

@tdd_issue_<N> — N is the bug issue number.

The bug issue number is #10356. All 6 new scenarios in event_bus.feature are tagged @tdd_issue_10354 — but 10354 is the TDD testing issue, not the bug issue. The tag must be @tdd_issue_10356.

Additionally, per CONTRIBUTING.md §TDD Bug Fix Workflow (lines 1103–1110):

The bug fix assignee creates a bugfix/ branch from master which now contains the tagged TDD test (from the merged TDD PR). They implement the fix and remove the @tdd_expected_fail tag from the test.

The TDD PR (branch tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe) was never merged to master. This bugfix PR adds the TDD scenarios directly in the bugfix branch without following the required 2-step process. As a result:

  • There are no @tdd_issue_10356 scenarios on master (confirmed via git grep)
  • There are no @tdd_expected_fail scenarios on master to be removed
  • The CI quality gate rejects this: "A bug fix PR that closes issue #N where no @tdd_issue_N test exists in the codebase is blocked by the CI quality gate — the TDD step was skipped."

Required fix:

  1. Create a tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe PR first with scenarios tagged @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 @tdd_expected_fail. Merge it to master.
  2. Rebase this bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe branch on the updated master.
  3. Remove @tdd_expected_fail from the 6 scenarios (leaving @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 in place permanently).

🔴 BLOCKING — Fixup commit (73832cd) missing ISSUES CLOSED footer

Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Every commit footer includes ISSUES CLOSED: #N or Refs: #N."

Commit 73832cd (fix(events): remove type: ignore[misc] from protocol unsubscribe stub and fix formatting) has no footer. Add Refs: #10356 as the footer (or squash this fixup commit into the main commit 1e96202).

Suggestion: squashing both commits into a single clean commit would be preferred (see commit hygiene rules in CONTRIBUTING.md).

🔴 BLOCKING — PR has merge conflicts with master (mergeable: false)

The Forgejo API reports mergeable: false for this PR. The branch must be rebased onto the current master and conflicts resolved before it can be merged.

🔴 BLOCKING — Forgejo dependency direction not set

Per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Requirements (item 2):

On the PR: add the linked issue under "blocks". Result: on the issue, the PR appears under "depends on".

Neither the PR (#10887) nor issue (#10356) has any Forgejo dependency links set. The PR must explicitly block issue #10356 via the dependency interface.

Code Quality Assessment (items not blocking)

The core implementation (protocol, ReactiveEventBus, LoggingEventBus) is well written:

  • contextlib.suppress(ValueError) is the correct no-op pattern
  • Docstrings are thorough and accurate
  • Type annotations are complete with no suppressions in production code
  • CHANGELOG.md entry is clear and correctly references the issue
  • Commit 1e96202 first line matches issue #10356 Metadata verbatim

Summary

One prior blocker (type safety) has been correctly resolved. Five blockers remain: three from the prior review (missing label, missing milestone, CI failing) plus two new ones (TDD workflow violation and missing ISSUES CLOSED footer). The CI unit_tests failure is directly traceable to the incorrect @tdd_issue_10354 tag — fixing the TDD workflow is the critical path item here.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

Re-review of PR #10887 (bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe) anchored to commit `73832cd6`. ## Prior Feedback — Resolution Status ### ✅ RESOLVED — Type Safety (`# type: ignore[misc]` in new step) Commit `73832cd` correctly replaces the `class _BareImpl(EventBus): # type: ignore[misc]` pattern with a `type("_BareImpl", (), {...})()` dynamic type construction. The new `step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable` function no longer adds a `# type: ignore` annotation. This blocker is fully addressed. ### ❌ STILL OPEN — Missing `Type/Bug` label on PR The PR still has no labels. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Exactly one `Type/` label" is required. The linked issue #10356 is `Type/Bug` — apply `Type/Bug` to this PR. ### ❌ STILL OPEN — Missing milestone on PR The PR still has no milestone assigned. Issue #10356 is in milestone `v3.2.0` — assign the same milestone to this PR. ### ❌ STILL OPEN — CI `unit_tests` failing CI run on `73832cd6` shows `unit_tests` is still failing after 5m37s. The `status-check` composite gate is therefore also failing. See the new blocking issue identified below — the TDD tag mismatch is almost certainly the root cause. --- ## New Findings ### 🔴 BLOCKING — TDD Workflow Violation: Wrong issue number in `@tdd_issue_N` tag Per CONTRIBUTING.md §TDD Issue Test Tags (line 1094, 1191): > `@tdd_issue_<N>` — N is the **bug issue number**. The bug issue number is **#10356**. All 6 new scenarios in `event_bus.feature` are tagged `@tdd_issue_10354` — but `10354` is the **TDD testing issue**, not the bug issue. The tag must be `@tdd_issue_10356`. Additionally, per CONTRIBUTING.md §TDD Bug Fix Workflow (lines 1103–1110): > The bug fix assignee creates a `bugfix/` branch from `master` **which now contains the tagged TDD test** (from the merged TDD PR). They implement the fix and **remove the `@tdd_expected_fail` tag** from the test. The TDD PR (branch `tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe`) was **never merged to master**. This bugfix PR adds the TDD scenarios directly in the bugfix branch without following the required 2-step process. As a result: - There are no `@tdd_issue_10356` scenarios on `master` (confirmed via git grep) - There are no `@tdd_expected_fail` scenarios on `master` to be removed - The CI quality gate rejects this: "A bug fix PR that closes issue `#N` where no `@tdd_issue_N` test exists in the codebase is blocked by the CI quality gate — the TDD step was skipped." **Required fix:** 1. Create a `tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe` PR first with scenarios tagged `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 @tdd_expected_fail`. Merge it to master. 2. Rebase this `bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe` branch on the updated master. 3. Remove `@tdd_expected_fail` from the 6 scenarios (leaving `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356` in place permanently). ### 🔴 BLOCKING — Fixup commit (`73832cd`) missing `ISSUES CLOSED` footer Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Every commit footer includes `ISSUES CLOSED: #N` or `Refs: #N`." Commit `73832cd` (`fix(events): remove type: ignore[misc] from protocol unsubscribe stub and fix formatting`) has no footer. Add `Refs: #10356` as the footer (or squash this fixup commit into the main commit `1e96202`). Suggestion: squashing both commits into a single clean commit would be preferred (see commit hygiene rules in CONTRIBUTING.md). ### 🔴 BLOCKING — PR has merge conflicts with master (`mergeable: false`) The Forgejo API reports `mergeable: false` for this PR. The branch must be rebased onto the current master and conflicts resolved before it can be merged. ### 🔴 BLOCKING — Forgejo dependency direction not set Per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Requirements (item 2): > On the PR: add the linked issue under "blocks". Result: on the issue, the PR appears under "depends on". Neither the PR (#10887) nor issue (#10356) has any Forgejo dependency links set. The PR must explicitly block issue #10356 via the dependency interface. --- ## Code Quality Assessment (items not blocking) The core implementation (protocol, `ReactiveEventBus`, `LoggingEventBus`) is well written: - `contextlib.suppress(ValueError)` is the correct no-op pattern - Docstrings are thorough and accurate - Type annotations are complete with no suppressions in production code - `CHANGELOG.md` entry is clear and correctly references the issue - Commit `1e96202` first line matches issue #10356 Metadata verbatim --- ## Summary One prior blocker (type safety) has been correctly resolved. Five blockers remain: three from the prior review (missing label, missing milestone, CI failing) plus two new ones (TDD workflow violation and missing `ISSUES CLOSED` footer). The CI `unit_tests` failure is directly traceable to the incorrect `@tdd_issue_10354` tag — fixing the TDD workflow is the critical path item here. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
features/event_bus.feature
@ -166,0 +171,4 @@
@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354
Scenario: ReactiveEventBus supports unsubscribing a handler
Given a ReactiveEventBus
When I subscribe to "plan.created" events
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-06 20:52:32 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

BLOCKING — WRONG TDD ISSUE NUMBER: All 6 new scenarios are tagged @tdd_issue_10354, but per CONTRIBUTING.md, N must be the bug issue number which is #10356 (not #10354, which is the TDD testing issue). Change all occurrences to @tdd_issue_10356.

Additionally, these scenarios were added directly in the bugfix branch without the required TDD PR step first being merged to master. The required process is:

  1. Merge a tdd/ PR with these scenarios tagged @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 @tdd_expected_fail
  2. Rebase this bugfix branch from the updated master
  3. Remove @tdd_expected_fail (keeping @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 permanently)

The CI unit_tests failure is almost certainly caused by this tag mismatch triggering the quality gate: "A bug fix PR that closes issue #N where no @tdd_issue_N test exists in the codebase is blocked by the CI quality gate."

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

**BLOCKING — WRONG TDD ISSUE NUMBER**: All 6 new scenarios are tagged `@tdd_issue_10354`, but per CONTRIBUTING.md, N must be the **bug issue number** which is `#10356` (not `#10354`, which is the TDD testing issue). Change all occurrences to `@tdd_issue_10356`. Additionally, these scenarios were added directly in the bugfix branch without the required TDD PR step first being merged to master. The required process is: 1. Merge a `tdd/` PR with these scenarios tagged `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 @tdd_expected_fail` 2. Rebase this bugfix branch from the updated master 3. Remove `@tdd_expected_fail` (keeping `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356` permanently) The CI `unit_tests` failure is almost certainly caused by this tag mismatch triggering the quality gate: "A bug fix PR that closes issue `#N` where no `@tdd_issue_N` test exists in the codebase is blocked by the CI quality gate." --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
features/steps/event_bus_steps.py
@ -477,3 +477,83 @@ def step_decision_service_has_event_bus(ctx: Context) -> None:
"DecisionService resolved from DI has no event_bus attribute"
)
assert svc.event_bus is not None, "DecisionService.event_bus should not be None"
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-06 20:52:32 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

BLOCKING — MISSING ISSUES CLOSED FOOTER: Commit 73832cd (the fixup commit that removed # type: ignore[misc]) has no commit footer. Every commit must include ISSUES CLOSED: #N or Refs: #N per CONTRIBUTING.md.

Suggestion: squash commits 1e96202 and 73832cd into a single clean commit to keep the history bisect-friendly. The squashed commit should retain the ISSUES CLOSED: #10356 footer from the first commit.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

**BLOCKING — MISSING ISSUES CLOSED FOOTER**: Commit `73832cd` (the fixup commit that removed `# type: ignore[misc]`) has no commit footer. Every commit must include `ISSUES CLOSED: #N` or `Refs: #N` per CONTRIBUTING.md. Suggestion: squash commits `1e96202` and `73832cd` into a single clean commit to keep the history bisect-friendly. The squashed commit should retain the `ISSUES CLOSED: #10356` footer from the first commit. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-06 20:52:41 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

--- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-05-11 22:58:16 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Re-review of PR #10887 (bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe) anchored to commit 73832cd6.

Prior Feedback — Resolution Status

✅ RESOLVED — Type Safety (# type: ignore[misc] removed from new step)

The _BareImpl pattern was correctly replaced with a type("_BareImpl", (), {...})() dynamic type construction in step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable. No # type: ignore annotation is added by this PR. This blocker is fully addressed.

❌ STILL OPEN — Missing Type/Bug label on PR

The PR still has no labels applied. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Exactly one Type/ label" is required for merge. The linked issue #10356 is Type/Bug — the PR must bear Type/Bug.

❌ STILL OPEN — Missing milestone on PR

The PR still has no milestone assigned. Issue #10356 is in milestone v3.2.0 — the PR must be assigned the same milestone.

❌ STILL OPEN — CI unit_tests failing

CI on 73832cd6 shows unit_tests still failing after 5m37s and status-check failing as a consequence. The root cause remains the wrong @tdd_issue_N tag number (see unchanged blocking item below).

❌ STILL OPEN — TDD Workflow Violation: Wrong @tdd_issue_N tag

All 6 new scenarios in features/event_bus.feature are still tagged @tdd_issue_10354. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, N must be the bug issue number which is #10356 (not #10354, the TDD testing issue). Additionally, the CHANGELOG.md entry on line 16 still reads: TDD regression scenarios tagged \@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354`` — this incorrect number is now also baked into the changelog.

Furthermore, the required TDD workflow 2-step process has still not been followed:

  • Branch tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe does not exist on the remote
  • No TDD PR was ever merged to master with @tdd_expected_fail scenarios
  • The CI quality gate blocks bug-fix PRs where no @tdd_issue_N test exists on master for the closed issue

Required fix (same as prior review):

  1. Create and merge a tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe PR with scenarios tagged @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 @tdd_expected_fail
  2. Rebase this bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe branch onto the updated master
  3. Remove @tdd_expected_fail from the 6 scenarios (keeping @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 permanently)
  4. Update CHANGELOG.md line 16 to reference @tdd_issue_10356 not @tdd_issue_10354

❌ STILL OPEN — Fixup commit 73832cd missing ISSUES CLOSED footer

Commit 73832cd (fix(events): remove type: ignore[misc] from protocol unsubscribe stub and fix formatting) still has no footer. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Every commit footer includes ISSUES CLOSED: #N or Refs: #N."

The preferred resolution (also recommended in the prior review) is to squash both commits into one clean commit that retains the ISSUES CLOSED: #10356 footer from 1e96202.

❌ STILL OPEN — PR is not mergeable

The Forgejo API still reports mergeable: false for this PR. The branch must be rebased onto current master and any conflicts resolved before it can be merged. Squashing the 2 commits first (to address the footer issue) and then rebasing would be the clean path.

❌ STILL OPEN — Forgejo dependency direction not set

Per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Requirements (item 2): the PR must explicitly block issue #10356 via the Forgejo dependency interface (PR → blocks → issue). No dependency links have been set. Verify by opening issue #10356 — the PR should appear under "depends on".

Branch Name Discrepancy (Informational)

Issue #10356 Metadata specifies Branch: fix/events-eventbus-unsubscribe, but this PR is on bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "The branch MUST match the Branch field in the issue Metadata section verbatim." While the bugfix/mN- prefix is the correct project convention for a bug fix, the Metadata branch field should be updated to match the actual branch being used, or the PR should be reopened on the correct branch.

Code Quality Assessment (Unchanged — Items Not Blocking)

The core implementation is well-written and has not regressed:

  • contextlib.suppress(ValueError) is the correct no-op pattern for remove()
  • Docstrings are thorough and accurate on all three new methods (protocol, reactive, logging)
  • Type annotations are complete with no suppressions in production code
  • _GCComponent test double is clean and well-scoped
  • step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable now uses the type(...)() pattern — no suppression
  • Commit 1e96202 first line matches issue #10356 Metadata verbatim ✓

Summary

One prior blocker (type safety) was correctly resolved. Six blockers remain open: missing Type/Bug label, missing milestone, CI unit_tests failing, wrong @tdd_issue_10354 tag (root cause of CI failure), missing ISSUES CLOSED footer on commit 73832cd, PR not mergeable, and Forgejo dependency direction not set.

The critical path remains the TDD workflow violation — fix the tag to @tdd_issue_10356 and follow the proper 2-step TDD process (or submit a TDD PR retroactively), then squash the two commits, rebase onto master, apply the label and milestone, and set the dependency link.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

Re-review of PR #10887 (`bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe`) anchored to commit `73832cd6`. ## Prior Feedback — Resolution Status ### ✅ RESOLVED — Type Safety (`# type: ignore[misc]` removed from new step) The `_BareImpl` pattern was correctly replaced with a `type("_BareImpl", (), {...})()` dynamic type construction in `step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable`. No `# type: ignore` annotation is added by this PR. This blocker is fully addressed. --- ### ❌ STILL OPEN — Missing `Type/Bug` label on PR The PR still has no labels applied. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Exactly one `Type/` label" is required for merge. The linked issue #10356 is `Type/Bug` — the PR must bear `Type/Bug`. ### ❌ STILL OPEN — Missing milestone on PR The PR still has no milestone assigned. Issue #10356 is in milestone `v3.2.0` — the PR must be assigned the same milestone. ### ❌ STILL OPEN — CI `unit_tests` failing CI on `73832cd6` shows `unit_tests` still failing after 5m37s and `status-check` failing as a consequence. The root cause remains the wrong `@tdd_issue_N` tag number (see unchanged blocking item below). ### ❌ STILL OPEN — TDD Workflow Violation: Wrong `@tdd_issue_N` tag All 6 new scenarios in `features/event_bus.feature` are still tagged `@tdd_issue_10354`. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, N must be the **bug issue number** which is `#10356` (not `#10354`, the TDD testing issue). Additionally, the `CHANGELOG.md` entry on line 16 still reads: `TDD regression scenarios tagged \`@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354\`` — this incorrect number is now also baked into the changelog. Furthermore, the required TDD workflow 2-step process has still not been followed: - Branch `tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe` does not exist on the remote - No TDD PR was ever merged to master with `@tdd_expected_fail` scenarios - The CI quality gate blocks bug-fix PRs where no `@tdd_issue_N` test exists on master for the closed issue Required fix (same as prior review): 1. Create and merge a `tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe` PR with scenarios tagged `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356 @tdd_expected_fail` 2. Rebase this `bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe` branch onto the updated master 3. Remove `@tdd_expected_fail` from the 6 scenarios (keeping `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356` permanently) 4. Update `CHANGELOG.md` line 16 to reference `@tdd_issue_10356` not `@tdd_issue_10354` ### ❌ STILL OPEN — Fixup commit `73832cd` missing `ISSUES CLOSED` footer Commit `73832cd` (`fix(events): remove type: ignore[misc] from protocol unsubscribe stub and fix formatting`) still has no footer. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "Every commit footer includes `ISSUES CLOSED: #N` or `Refs: #N`." The preferred resolution (also recommended in the prior review) is to squash both commits into one clean commit that retains the `ISSUES CLOSED: #10356` footer from `1e96202`. ### ❌ STILL OPEN — PR is not mergeable The Forgejo API still reports `mergeable: false` for this PR. The branch must be rebased onto current master and any conflicts resolved before it can be merged. Squashing the 2 commits first (to address the footer issue) and then rebasing would be the clean path. ### ❌ STILL OPEN — Forgejo dependency direction not set Per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Requirements (item 2): the PR must explicitly block issue #10356 via the Forgejo dependency interface (PR → blocks → issue). No dependency links have been set. Verify by opening issue #10356 — the PR should appear under "depends on". --- ## Branch Name Discrepancy (Informational) Issue #10356 Metadata specifies `Branch: fix/events-eventbus-unsubscribe`, but this PR is on `bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe`. Per CONTRIBUTING.md: "The branch MUST match the Branch field in the issue Metadata section verbatim." While the `bugfix/mN-` prefix is the correct project convention for a bug fix, the Metadata branch field should be updated to match the actual branch being used, or the PR should be reopened on the correct branch. --- ## Code Quality Assessment (Unchanged — Items Not Blocking) The core implementation is well-written and has not regressed: - `contextlib.suppress(ValueError)` is the correct no-op pattern for `remove()` - Docstrings are thorough and accurate on all three new methods (protocol, reactive, logging) - Type annotations are complete with no suppressions in production code - `_GCComponent` test double is clean and well-scoped - `step_protocol_unsubscribe_stub_callable` now uses the `type(...)()` pattern — no suppression - Commit `1e96202` first line matches issue #10356 Metadata verbatim ✓ --- ## Summary One prior blocker (type safety) was correctly resolved. **Six blockers remain open:** missing `Type/Bug` label, missing milestone, CI `unit_tests` failing, wrong `@tdd_issue_10354` tag (root cause of CI failure), missing `ISSUES CLOSED` footer on commit `73832cd`, PR not mergeable, and Forgejo dependency direction not set. The critical path remains the TDD workflow violation — fix the tag to `@tdd_issue_10356` and follow the proper 2-step TDD process (or submit a TDD PR retroactively), then squash the two commits, rebase onto master, apply the label and milestone, and set the dependency link. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
CHANGELOG.md
@ -8,0 +13,4 @@
could never be removed, causing bound-method handler references to keep owning
objects alive indefinitely in long-running processes. The new `unsubscribe()` method
removes the handler from `_subscriptions`; unsubscribing a handler that was never
registered is a no-op. TDD regression scenarios tagged `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354`
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-11 22:58:16 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

BLOCKING — INCORRECT ISSUE NUMBER IN CHANGELOG: This line reads @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354 but the correct tag is @tdd_issue_10356 (the bug issue number). Please update to @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

**BLOCKING — INCORRECT ISSUE NUMBER IN CHANGELOG**: This line reads `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354` but the correct tag is `@tdd_issue_10356` (the bug issue number). Please update to `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10356`. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
features/event_bus.feature
@ -166,0 +171,4 @@
@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_10354
Scenario: ReactiveEventBus supports unsubscribing a handler
Given a ReactiveEventBus
When I subscribe to "plan.created" events
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-11 22:58:16 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

BLOCKING — WRONG TDD ISSUE NUMBER (still not fixed): All 6 new scenarios are still tagged @tdd_issue_10354. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, N must be the bug issue number which is #10356 (not #10354, the TDD testing issue). This tag mismatch is the root cause of the CI unit_tests failure.

Required fix:

  1. Change all @tdd_issue_10354 to @tdd_issue_10356 across all 6 scenarios
  2. Follow the 2-step TDD process: create and merge a tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe PR first with @tdd_expected_fail tags, rebase this branch, then remove @tdd_expected_fail

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

**BLOCKING — WRONG TDD ISSUE NUMBER (still not fixed)**: All 6 new scenarios are still tagged `@tdd_issue_10354`. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, N must be the **bug issue number** which is `#10356` (not `#10354`, the TDD testing issue). This tag mismatch is the root cause of the CI `unit_tests` failure. Required fix: 1. Change all `@tdd_issue_10354` to `@tdd_issue_10356` across all 6 scenarios 2. Follow the 2-step TDD process: create and merge a `tdd/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe` PR first with `@tdd_expected_fail` tags, rebase this branch, then remove `@tdd_expected_fail` --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-11 22:58:22 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

--- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
Some checks failed
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 58s
Details
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 1m22s
Required
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 1m14s
Required
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 1m47s
Required
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 1m59s
Required
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 2m2s
Required
Details
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 20s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m1s
Required
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m57s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Failing after 5m37s
Required
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Has been skipped
Required
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 14m46s
Required
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Failing after 3s
Details
This pull request has changes conflicting with the target branch.
  • features/event_bus.feature
  • features/steps/event_bus_steps.py
View command line instructions

Manual merge helper

Use this merge commit message when completing the merge manually.

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.
git fetch -u origin bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe:bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe
git switch bugfix/m3-eventbus-unsubscribe
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
HAL9001
Labels
Clear labels   
auto/needs-reevaluation
Controller deferred this PR; awaiting Phase 6+ scope-evaluator or operator re-enablement.

  
controller-managed
Auto-agents controller manages this PR/issue (see tools/controller/deploy/RUNBOOK.md). Remove this label to abandon controller management.

  
auto/blocked-by-deps
PR blocked by an open issue dependency. Operator must close the dep (or remove the dependency link) before the merge driver can act. Auto-cleared by merge_drive when no open deps remain.

  
auto/ci-timeout
Most recent merge cycle hit CI timeout. Driver excludes this PR while last merge_cycle row is < 30 min old; label persists thereafter as visible history.

  
auto/claimed-implementer
Currently being processed by an implementer worker.

  
auto/claimed-merge
Currently being processed by the merge driver.

  
auto/claimed-reviewer
Currently being processed by a reviewer worker.

  
auto/driver-down
Merge driver heartbeat stale; pipeline halted. Closed automatically on next clean tick.

  
auto/invariant-violation
Detected master commit violating the strict merge invariant. Tracked as an issue (not a PR label); kept here for label completeness.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-0
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 0 slot (`tier-0`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-1
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 1 slot (`tier-1`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-2
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 2 slot (`tier-2`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml. Gated behind IMPLEMENTER_ESCALATION_TIER2_ENABLED.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-min
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier -1 slot (`tier-min`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml. Suffix is ``-min`` (not ``--1``) so the Forgejo UI reads naturally.

  
Automation Tracking
Tracking issues used by the AI Automation system for agents to communicate and report.

  
auto/needs-conflict-resolution
Rebase conflict needs LLM conflict-resolver.

  
auto/needs-implementer
Failing CI needs implementer attention.

  
auto/postmortem
Documenting a driver incident or rollback.

  
auto/ready-to-merge
Reviewer has APPROVED this PR and no later REQUEST_CHANGES is outstanding. The merge driver requires this label to even consider a PR for merging. Set by the reviewer worker on APPROVE; cleared on REQUEST_CHANGES.

  
auto/restart-throttled
Train repeatedly lost master-tempo races. Driver excludes via merge_cycle until cooldown elapses; label persists as visible history.

  
auto/revert
Revert PR backing out an invariant violation. Fast-tracked through the merge driver.

  
auto/sentinel
Sentinel PR duplicated from upstream into a personal fork by tools/duplicate_prs_to_fork.py for pipeline testing. Lives only in the fork; the canonical pipeline never sees it.

  
auto/stale-inactivity
No implementer activity for N days. Flagged for human review. Auto-cleared on next push to head branch.

  
auto/unstable
Repeatedly fails on current master (>= 3 ci-fail-on-rebased-sha releases in 12 h). Excluded from driver until human triage.

  
Blocked
A ticket in a blocked state and unable to complete until some other task is completed first.

  
Bounty
$100
 A bounty of $100 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$1000
 A bounty of $1000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$10000
 A bounty of $10000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$20
 A bounty of $20 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$2000
 A bounty of $2000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$250
 A bounty of $250 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$50
 A bounty of $50 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$500
 A bounty of $500 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$5000
 A bounty of $5000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$750
 A bounty of $750 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
MoSCoW
Could have
 Could have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.

  
MoSCoW
Must have
 Must have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.

  
MoSCoW
Should have
 Should have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.

  
Needs Feedback
There are questions in the ticket that can not be completed until the project owner provides clarity.

  
Points
1
 1 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
13
 13 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
2
 2 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
21
 21 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
3
 3 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
34
 34 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
5
 5 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
55
 55 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
8
 8 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
88
 88 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Priority
Backlog
 This ticket has backlogged priority and is not to be worked on yet

  
Priority
CI Blocker
 Critical priority issue that blocks CI/CD pipeline and prevents PR merges

  
Priority
Critical
 The priority is critical

  
Priority
High
 The priority is high

  
Priority
Low
 The priority is low

  
Priority
Medium
 The priority is medium

  
Signed-off: Owner
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.

  
Signed-off: Scrum Master
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.

  
Signed-off: Tech Lead
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.

  
Spike
A ticket for learning a tool or technology that is needed to be able to do future planning and design.

  
State
Completed
 The ticket has been fully implemented, completed, and merged with the source code. This label should only be applied once a ticket is closed.

  
State
Duplicate
 A ticket that represents the same content as an existing ticket.

  
State
In Progress
 A ticket that is actively being developed.

  
State
In Review
 A ticket that has had some code completed to implement but is waiting to pass peer review and is not yet merged in.

  
State
Paused
 This ticket's work started but wasn't finished. It's on hold (likely in a feature branch) and will be resumed later, either due to a blocker or a delay.

  
State
Unverified
 All new tickets start in this state. A developer may set it to show the ticket is unverified. This means we haven't agreed to work on it. It will either move to a verified state or be closed as wontdo.

  
State
Verified
 The issue has been verified by a developer as legitimate. It will be worked on and verified tickets are now considered part of the backlog.

  
State
Wont Do
 This ticket has been decided it wont be done. This may mean the bug has been determined to not be real (cant verify) or the feature is one we have decided we dont want to adopt.

  
Type
Automation
 Any edits or discussion about the AI automated coding system.

  
Type
Bug
 Something that doesnt work as intended.

  
Type
Discussion
 Anytime a ticket represents a discussion about a subject and doesnt fall into one of the other categories.

  
Type
Documentation
 An error or improvement needed in the documentation.

  
Type
Epic
 Any first tier epic. That is, an epic which contains only issues as children and will not have sub-epics.

  
Type
Feature
 Some new functionality not present.

  
Type
Legendary
 A type of Epic which will contain other Epics.

  
Type
Refactor
 A code change that restructures existing code without changing its external behavior.

  
Type
Support
 Someone needs help using the project.

  
Type
Task
 A generic task that doesnt fit into the other type categories.

  
Type
Testing
 Work exclusively focusing on fixing or expanding testing.

No labels
auto/needs-reevaluation
controller-managed
auto/blocked-by-deps
auto/ci-timeout
auto/claimed-implementer
auto/claimed-merge
auto/claimed-reviewer
auto/driver-down
auto/invariant-violation
auto/last-attempt-tier-0
auto/last-attempt-tier-1
auto/last-attempt-tier-2
auto/last-attempt-tier-min
Automation Tracking
auto/needs-conflict-resolution
auto/needs-implementer
auto/postmortem
auto/ready-to-merge
auto/restart-throttled
auto/revert
auto/sentinel
auto/stale-inactivity
auto/unstable
Blocked
Bounty
$100
Bounty
$1000
Bounty
$10000
Bounty
$20
Bounty
$2000
Bounty
$250
Bounty
$50
Bounty
$500
Bounty
$5000
Bounty
$750
MoSCoW
Could have
MoSCoW
Must have
MoSCoW
Should have
Needs Feedback
Points
1
Points
13
Points
2
Points
21
Points
3
Points
34
Points
5
Points
55
Points
8
Points
88
Priority
Backlog
Priority
CI Blocker
Priority
Critical
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Signed-off: Owner
Signed-off: Scrum Master
Signed-off: Tech Lead
Spike
State
Completed
State
Duplicate
State
In Progress
State
In Review
State
Paused
State
Unverified
State
Verified
State
Wont Do
Type
Automation
Type
Bug
Type
Discussion
Type
Documentation
Type
Epic
Type
Feature
Type
Legendary
Type
Refactor
Type
Support
Type
Task
Type
Testing
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
cleveragents/cleveragents-core!10887
No description provided.