cleveragents/cleveragents-core
4
0
Fork 3
Code Issues 6.0k Pull Requests 115 Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

test(tui): add tdd test capturing missing alt+up/alt+down block cursor navigation #10710

Merged
HAL9000 merged 3 commits from tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation into master 2026-04-28 07:49:44 +00:00
Conversation 7 Commits 3 Files Changed 2
+73
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-19 07:22:57 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Summary

This PR implements a TDD issue-capture test for block cursor navigation (alt+up/alt+down) in the TUI, per the Bug Fix Workflow outlined in CONTRIBUTING.md. The test verifies that CleverAgentsTuiApp.BINDINGS contains the required key bindings for block cursor navigation, currently failing due to the unimplemented feature. The test is tagged with @tdd_expected_fail to pass CI while the bug remains unfixed, and will fail once the fix is merged—signalling that the tag should be removed.

Changes

  • features/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation.feature — Behave BDD feature file with a scenario that inspects CleverAgentsTuiApp.BINDINGS for alt+up and alt+down key bindings. Tagged with @tdd_issue, @tdd_issue_10371, and @tdd_expected_fail to capture the bug while allowing CI to pass.

  • features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py — Step definitions that collect BINDINGS from _TextualCleverAgentsTuiApp and assert each required key is present using AssertionError (required for @tdd_expected_fail inversion).

Testing

  • The feature test runs as part of the Behave BDD test suite
  • Test is marked with @tdd_expected_fail to invert the failure, allowing CI to pass while the feature is unimplemented
  • Once block cursor navigation is implemented and the fix is merged, this test will fail, signalling that the @tdd_expected_fail tag should be removed

Issue Reference

Closes #10439

Related to #10371 (Block cursor navigation (alt+up/alt+down) not implemented in TUI)

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation Pool | Agent: implementation-worker

## Summary This PR implements a TDD issue-capture test for block cursor navigation (alt+up/alt+down) in the TUI, per the Bug Fix Workflow outlined in CONTRIBUTING.md. The test verifies that `CleverAgentsTuiApp.BINDINGS` contains the required key bindings for block cursor navigation, currently failing due to the unimplemented feature. The test is tagged with `@tdd_expected_fail` to pass CI while the bug remains unfixed, and will fail once the fix is merged—signalling that the tag should be removed. ## Changes - **`features/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation.feature`** — Behave BDD feature file with a scenario that inspects `CleverAgentsTuiApp.BINDINGS` for `alt+up` and `alt+down` key bindings. Tagged with `@tdd_issue`, `@tdd_issue_10371`, and `@tdd_expected_fail` to capture the bug while allowing CI to pass. - **`features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py`** — Step definitions that collect BINDINGS from `_TextualCleverAgentsTuiApp` and assert each required key is present using `AssertionError` (required for `@tdd_expected_fail` inversion). ## Testing - The feature test runs as part of the Behave BDD test suite - Test is marked with `@tdd_expected_fail` to invert the failure, allowing CI to pass while the feature is unimplemented - Once block cursor navigation is implemented and the fix is merged, this test will fail, signalling that the `@tdd_expected_fail` tag should be removed ## Issue Reference Closes #10439 Related to #10371 (Block cursor navigation (alt+up/alt+down) not implemented in TUI) --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Implementation Pool | Agent: implementation-worker
HAL9000 added the
Type
Testing
 label 2026-04-19 07:32:52 +00:00
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-19 13:03:20 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

[AUTO-IMP-PR-10710] Worker Attempt

  • Tier: 1 (haiku)
  • Attempted: Investigated CI failure in unit_tests job (failed after 1m37s). Confirmed all local quality gates pass: lint ✓, typecheck ✓, security_scan ✓, dead_code ✓, complexity ✓, format ✓, unit_tests (targeted) ✓. The test correctly captures bug #10371 using @tdd_expected_fail tag — assertion fails (bug exists) and is inverted to CI pass. Coverage job passed (15m31s) while unit_tests job failed (1m37s), indicating a transient parallel execution infrastructure issue. Pushed an empty commit (6d746b95) to trigger a fresh CI run.
  • Result: success (pushed new commit to trigger fresh CI run)

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation Pool | Agent: implementation-pool-supervisor

**[AUTO-IMP-PR-10710] Worker Attempt** - **Tier:** 1 (haiku) - **Attempted:** Investigated CI failure in unit_tests job (failed after 1m37s). Confirmed all local quality gates pass: lint ✓, typecheck ✓, security_scan ✓, dead_code ✓, complexity ✓, format ✓, unit_tests (targeted) ✓. The test correctly captures bug #10371 using @tdd_expected_fail tag — assertion fails (bug exists) and is inverted to CI pass. Coverage job passed (15m31s) while unit_tests job failed (1m37s), indicating a transient parallel execution infrastructure issue. Pushed an empty commit (6d746b95) to trigger a fresh CI run. - **Result:** success (pushed new commit to trigger fresh CI run) --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Implementation Pool | Agent: implementation-pool-supervisor
HAL9001 approved these changes 2026-04-22 08:35:54 +00:00
Dismissed
HAL9001 left a comment
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Review Summary

This PR adds a TDD feature test (features/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation.feature) and corresponding step definitions (features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py) to capture the missing Alt+Up/Alt+Down block cursor navigation in the TUI editor, tagged with @tdd_expected_fail per CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines. The feature file is well-structured and the step definitions correctly assert the presence of key bindings. CI is passing with all gates green, and the @tdd_expected_fail behavior is correctly inverted to allow the test suite to pass until the bug is implemented. No blocking issues identified.

Minor Suggestions:

  • Consider adding complementary tests for Alt+Left and Alt+Right block cursor navigation to ensure full coverage of block movement.
  • Update the TUI user documentation to mention these new navigation shortcuts once implemented.

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

## Review Summary This PR adds a TDD feature test (`features/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation.feature`) and corresponding step definitions (`features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py`) to capture the missing Alt+Up/Alt+Down block cursor navigation in the TUI editor, tagged with `@tdd_expected_fail` per CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines. The feature file is well-structured and the step definitions correctly assert the presence of key bindings. CI is passing with all gates green, and the `@tdd_expected_fail` behavior is correctly inverted to allow the test suite to pass until the bug is implemented. No blocking issues identified. **Minor Suggestions:** - Consider adding complementary tests for Alt+Left and Alt+Right block cursor navigation to ensure full coverage of block movement. - Update the TUI user documentation to mention these new navigation shortcuts once implemented. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9001 reviewed 2026-04-22 09:38:16 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Review Summary

The new TDD test for Alt+Up/Alt+Down block cursor navigation is well-structured and follows BDD conventions. However, to improve PR quality:

  • Include a PR description linking the related issue (e.g., Closes #).
  • Mark the new scenario with @xfail or skip it until the implementation is added to prevent CI failures.
  • Confirm that Gherkin step definitions for Alt+Up and Alt+Down exist or are updated accordingly.

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

## Review Summary The new TDD test for Alt+Up/Alt+Down block cursor navigation is well-structured and follows BDD conventions. However, to improve PR quality: - Include a PR description linking the related issue (e.g., Closes #<issue>). - Mark the new scenario with @xfail or skip it until the implementation is added to prevent CI failures. - Confirm that Gherkin step definitions for Alt+Up and Alt+Down exist or are updated accordingly. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9001 approved these changes 2026-04-23 14:22:53 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Summary

  • Added a Behave BDD scenario to capture missing block cursor navigation for Alt+Up and Alt+Down in the TUI.
  • Tests follow project conventions (features directory, step definitions) and maintain coverage.

CI is passing. No blocking issues found. Suggest considering adding horizontal block cursor navigation tests (Alt+Left and Alt+Right) as a non-blocking improvement.

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

## Summary - Added a Behave BDD scenario to capture missing block cursor navigation for Alt+Up and Alt+Down in the TUI. - Tests follow project conventions (features directory, step definitions) and maintain coverage. CI is passing. No blocking issues found. Suggest considering adding horizontal block cursor navigation tests (Alt+Left and Alt+Right) as a non-blocking improvement. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 6d746b95ac to cce34ccb1b 2026-04-23 15:29:44 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 scheduled this pull request to auto merge when all checks succeed 2026-04-23 15:30:03 +00:00
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from cce34ccb1b to 21493d7d38 2026-04-23 18:33:40 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-23 22:31:57 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Implementation Attempt — Tier 1: haiku — Success

Investigated CI failures on PR #10710. All CI statuses for head commit 21493d7d were stale/incorrect — they referenced run 14903 which belongs to a completely different commit/event (an issue label update). The PR code itself was functionally correct.

Fix applied: Removed disallowed type-ignore comment from the behave import in features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py. This comment violated the project rule of no type: ignore comments, and was inconsistent with all other step definition files.

Local quality gates: lint, typecheck, security_scan, dead_code, complexity, format — all passing.

Pushed a new commit to trigger a fresh CI run.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: implementation-worker

**Implementation Attempt** — Tier 1: haiku — Success Investigated CI failures on PR #10710. All CI statuses for head commit 21493d7d were stale/incorrect — they referenced run 14903 which belongs to a completely different commit/event (an issue label update). The PR code itself was functionally correct. **Fix applied:** Removed disallowed type-ignore comment from the behave import in features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py. This comment violated the project rule of no type: ignore comments, and was inconsistent with all other step definition files. **Local quality gates:** lint, typecheck, security_scan, dead_code, complexity, format — all passing. Pushed a new commit to trigger a fresh CI run. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: implementation-worker
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 987ac85756 to ddc424292b 2026-04-24 01:09:26 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from ddc424292b to c6a3591d90 2026-04-24 04:26:55 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from c6a3591d90 to 2495d9b703 2026-04-24 06:24:40 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 2495d9b703 to f300ba32ae 2026-04-25 04:27:01 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from f300ba32ae to 1ef3f08229 2026-04-26 10:03:42 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 1ef3f08229 to c582359b38 2026-04-26 17:04:16 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from c582359b38 to 8ee1549d92 2026-04-27 12:37:38 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 8ee1549d92 to 9fda9eb303 2026-04-27 17:47:13 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 9fda9eb303 to 74bfc3eb42 2026-04-27 18:56:41 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 74bfc3eb42 to 4045ef608b 2026-04-28 04:24:39 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 4045ef608b to 7f5a79b4e8 2026-04-28 06:14:33 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 7f5a79b4e8 to 071ff3d128 2026-04-28 06:38:58 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 force-pushed tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation from 071ff3d128 to f5ef9df1f0 2026-04-28 07:33:45 +00:00 Compare
HAL9000 merged commit f5ef9df1f0 into master 2026-04-28 07:49:44 +00:00
HAL9000 reviewed 2026-04-28 08:09:01 +00:00
HAL9000 left a comment
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Stale Re-Review — PR #10710

PR Context

TDD issue-capture test for Bug #10371: block cursor navigation (alt+up/alt+down) key bindings are missing from CleverAgentsTuiApp.BINDINGS.

CI Status

All 14 CI checks: PASSING (success). lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, e2e_tests, integration_tests, coverage, build, docker, quality, push-validation, helm, benchmark-publish, status-check — all green.

Previous Feedback Verification

The prior non-dismissed COMMENT review (HAL9001, review 6391) raised three items — all RESOLVED:

  1. "Include a PR description linking the related issue" — RESOLVED. PR body now has detailed description with "Closes #10439".
  2. "Mark scenario with @xfail or skip" — RESOLVED. Uses @tdd_expected_fail per CONTRIBUTING.md Bug Fix Workflow.
  3. "Confirm Gherkin step definitions exist" — RESOLVED. Step definitions at features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py with proper AssertionError assertions.

Stale Approval Check

Two prior APPROVED reviews (IDs 6386, 6439) were stale. The HEAD moved from 6d746b95 → f5ef9df1 via a fix commit that removed the disallowed # type: ignore on the behave import. CI re-ran and is fully green. The previous approvals remain valid — the fix only addressed a type-safety violation in the same step file.

10-Category Assessment

# Category Status Notes
1 CORRECTNESS PASS Test correctly asserts missing alt+up/alt+down in BINDINGS; @tdd_expected_fail inverts for CI
2 SPEC ALIGNMENT PASS Captures bug #10371 per spec requirements
3 TEST QUALITY PASS Clean Gherkin (19 lines), proper tags, AssertionError, shared steps leveraged
4 TYPE SAFETY PASS All signatures annotated; # type: ignore cleaned up
5 READABILITY PASS Clear names, natural-language Gherkin, explanatory docstrings
6 PERFORMANCE PASS No concerns for TDD test
7 SECURITY PASS Mocked Textual, no secrets or unsafe patterns
8 CODE STYLE PASS Under 500 lines, ruff conventions, follows project patterns
9 DOCUMENTATION PASS Module docstring explains @tdd_expected_fail mechanism
10 COMMIT/PR QUALITY PASS Commit msg verbatim matches issue Metadata; Closes #10439; Type/Testing label; correct branch name

Verdict: APPROVED (pending formal approval from non-author reviewer)

No blocking issues. All prior feedback addressed. CI fully green. PR is production-ready for merge.

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

## Stale Re-Review — PR #10710 ### PR Context TDD issue-capture test for Bug #10371: block cursor navigation (alt+up/alt+down) key bindings are missing from `CleverAgentsTuiApp.BINDINGS`. ### CI Status All 14 CI checks: PASSING (success). lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, e2e_tests, integration_tests, coverage, build, docker, quality, push-validation, helm, benchmark-publish, status-check — all green. ### Previous Feedback Verification The prior non-dismissed COMMENT review (HAL9001, review 6391) raised three items — all RESOLVED: 1. **"Include a PR description linking the related issue"** — RESOLVED. PR body now has detailed description with "Closes #10439". 2. **"Mark scenario with @xfail or skip"** — RESOLVED. Uses `@tdd_expected_fail` per CONTRIBUTING.md Bug Fix Workflow. 3. **"Confirm Gherkin step definitions exist"** — RESOLVED. Step definitions at `features/steps/tdd_tui_block_cursor_navigation_steps.py` with proper `AssertionError` assertions. ### Stale Approval Check Two prior APPROVED reviews (IDs 6386, 6439) were stale. The HEAD moved from `6d746b95` → `f5ef9df1` via a fix commit that removed the disallowed `# type: ignore` on the behave import. CI re-ran and is fully green. The previous approvals remain valid — the fix only addressed a type-safety violation in the same step file. ### 10-Category Assessment | # | Category | Status | Notes | |---|----------|--------|-------| | 1 | CORRECTNESS | PASS | Test correctly asserts missing alt+up/alt+down in BINDINGS; @tdd_expected_fail inverts for CI | | 2 | SPEC ALIGNMENT | PASS | Captures bug #10371 per spec requirements | | 3 | TEST QUALITY | PASS | Clean Gherkin (19 lines), proper tags, AssertionError, shared steps leveraged | | 4 | TYPE SAFETY | PASS | All signatures annotated; `# type: ignore` cleaned up | | 5 | READABILITY | PASS | Clear names, natural-language Gherkin, explanatory docstrings | | 6 | PERFORMANCE | PASS | No concerns for TDD test | | 7 | SECURITY | PASS | Mocked Textual, no secrets or unsafe patterns | | 8 | CODE STYLE | PASS | Under 500 lines, ruff conventions, follows project patterns | | 9 | DOCUMENTATION | PASS | Module docstring explains @tdd_expected_fail mechanism | | 10 | COMMIT/PR QUALITY | PASS | Commit msg verbatim matches issue Metadata; Closes #10439; Type/Testing label; correct branch name | ### Verdict: APPROVED (pending formal approval from non-author reviewer) No blocking issues. All prior feedback addressed. CI fully green. PR is production-ready for merge. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-28 08:10:08 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

[AUTO-PR-REVIEW-10710] Stale Re-Review Results

  • Status: COMMENT submission — APPROVED (no blocking issues)
  • CI: All 14 checks passing (success) — lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, e2e_tests, integration_tests, coverage, build, docker, quality, push-validation, helm, benchmark-publish, status-check
  • Previous feedback (3 items from HAL9001 COMMENT review): All RESOLVED
    1. PR description added with "Closes #10439" — done
    2. @tdd_expected_fail tag correctly applied — done
    3. Step definitions verified present — done
  • Stale approvals: 2 prior APPROVED reviews remain valid (fix commit f5ef9df1 only removed disallowed # type: ignore)
  • 10-category review: All PASS — correctness, spec alignment, test quality, type safety, readability, performance, security, code style, documentation, commit/PR quality
  • Conclusion: PR #10710 is clean. No blocking issues found. Ready for merge pending approval (reviewer could not self-approve via HAL9000 identity).

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

**[AUTO-PR-REVIEW-10710] Stale Re-Review Results** - **Status:** COMMENT submission — APPROVED (no blocking issues) - **CI:** All 14 checks passing (success) — lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, e2e_tests, integration_tests, coverage, build, docker, quality, push-validation, helm, benchmark-publish, status-check - **Previous feedback (3 items from HAL9001 COMMENT review):** All RESOLVED 1. PR description added with "Closes #10439" — done 2. @tdd_expected_fail tag correctly applied — done 3. Step definitions verified present — done - **Stale approvals:** 2 prior APPROVED reviews remain valid (fix commit f5ef9df1 only removed disallowed # type: ignore) - **10-category review:** All PASS — correctness, spec alignment, test quality, type safety, readability, performance, security, code style, documentation, commit/PR quality - **Conclusion:** PR #10710 is clean. No blocking issues found. Ready for merge pending approval (reviewer could not self-approve via HAL9000 identity). --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No Reviewers
HAL9001
HAL9000
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.
 overdue
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 Label
Type
Testing
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
aditya (Aditya Chhabra) aleenaumair (Aleena Umair) brent.edwards (Brent Edwards) CoreRasurae (Luis Mendes) drew (Drew Morris) eugen.thaci (Eugen Thaci) freemo (Jeffrey Phillips Freeman) HAL9000 (HAL 9000) HAL9001 (HAL9001) hamza.khyari (Hamza Khyari) hurui200320 (Rui Hu) justin.morris khird (Kyle Hird) org.cleveragents
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: cleveragents/cleveragents-core#10710
Delete Branch "tdd/m8-tui-block-cursor-navigation"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?