fix(cli): honour project-level execution-env-priority in resolution #1136

Merged

hamza.khyari merged 1 commit from bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 into master 2026-03-31 11:53:09 +00:00

Conversation 6 Commits 1 Files changed 7 +235 -8

hamza.khyari commented 2026-03-23 13:20:05 +00:00

Member

Copy link

Summary

• Thread plan_env and project_env through the tool execution chain so the ExecutionEnvironmentResolver receives project-level execution environment values
• The resolver's precedence logic (tool > plan > project > default) was already correct, but callers never passed project_env — tools always fell through to the global HOST default

Closes #1080

Dependency

Requires PR #1135 to be merged first. PR #1135 adds the CLI flag (project context set --execution-env-priority) and persistence for project-level execution environment. This PR (#1136) threads the persisted value through the execution chain to the resolver.

Root Cause

The bug is in the call chain, not the resolver. ToolCallRouter.route(), ToolCallingRuntime._execute_tool_call(), and PlanExecutionContext never threaded project_env through to ToolRunner.execute(). The resolver received project_env=None for every invocation, so precedence level 2 was always skipped.

Changes

File	Change
PlanExecutionContext	Added plan_env and project_env fields + properties
ToolCallRouter	Accept plan_env/project_env in constructor, pass to runner.execute() in route() and route_streaming()
ToolCallingRuntime	Accept plan_env/project_env, pass to runner.execute() in the direct-runner fallback path
tool_router_steps.py	Updated monkey-patched execute stubs to accept explicit plan_env/project_env keyword arguments
exec_env_project_override.feature	4 new BDD scenarios proving plan_env/project_env reach the resolver via ToolCallRouter
CHANGELOG.md	Entry for #1080

Tests

4 BDD scenarios (22 steps) verify the full chain:

1. project_env="container" reaches resolver
2. plan_env="host" reaches resolver
3. Both plan_env and project_env reach resolver simultaneously
4. Neither passed → resolver receives None for both

All 99 existing tool_router + execution_environment scenarios pass.

Note on E2E Test

The issue mentions removing @tdd_expected_fail from a WF17 precedence level 2 test case. No such test exists — the WF17 E2E suite has not been written yet.

ISSUES CLOSED: #1080

## Summary - Thread `plan_env` and `project_env` through the tool execution chain so the `ExecutionEnvironmentResolver` receives project-level execution environment values - The resolver's precedence logic (tool > plan > project > default) was already correct, but callers never passed `project_env` — tools always fell through to the global HOST default Closes #1080 ## Dependency **Requires PR #1135 to be merged first.** PR #1135 adds the CLI flag (`project context set --execution-env-priority`) and persistence for project-level execution environment. This PR (#1136) threads the persisted value through the execution chain to the resolver. ## Root Cause The bug is in the **call chain**, not the resolver. `ToolCallRouter.route()`, `ToolCallingRuntime._execute_tool_call()`, and `PlanExecutionContext` never threaded `project_env` through to `ToolRunner.execute()`. The resolver received `project_env=None` for every invocation, so precedence level 2 was always skipped. ## Changes | File | Change | |---|---| | `PlanExecutionContext` | Added `plan_env` and `project_env` fields + properties | | `ToolCallRouter` | Accept `plan_env`/`project_env` in constructor, pass to `runner.execute()` in `route()` and `route_streaming()` | | `ToolCallingRuntime` | Accept `plan_env`/`project_env`, pass to `runner.execute()` in the direct-runner fallback path | | `tool_router_steps.py` | Updated monkey-patched execute stubs to accept explicit `plan_env`/`project_env` keyword arguments | | `exec_env_project_override.feature` | **4 new BDD scenarios** proving plan_env/project_env reach the resolver via ToolCallRouter | | `CHANGELOG.md` | Entry for #1080 | ## Tests 4 BDD scenarios (22 steps) verify the full chain: 1. `project_env="container"` reaches resolver 2. `plan_env="host"` reaches resolver 3. Both `plan_env` and `project_env` reach resolver simultaneously 4. Neither passed → resolver receives `None` for both All 99 existing tool_router + execution_environment scenarios pass. ## Note on E2E Test The issue mentions removing `@tdd_expected_fail` from a WF17 precedence level 2 test case. No such test exists — the WF17 E2E suite has not been written yet. ISSUES CLOSED: #1080

hamza.khyari added the

State

In Review

Type

Bug

Priority

Critical

labels 2026-03-23 13:20:16 +00:00

hamza.khyari added this to the v3.5.0 milestone 2026-03-23 13:20:17 +00:00

hamza.khyari added the

MoSCoW

Must have

label 2026-03-23 13:20:25 +00:00

hamza.khyari self-assigned this 2026-03-23 13:34:53 +00:00

freemo requested changes 2026-03-24 15:24:37 +00:00

Dismissed

freemo left a comment

Copy link

Review: REQUEST CHANGES

The diff itself is clean, minimal, and well-structured — adding plan_env/project_env parameters to PlanExecutionContext, ToolCallRouter, and ToolCallingRuntime. The commit messages are excellent and the code follows existing patterns. However, there are two significant gaps.

Blocking Issues

1. No production caller passes the new parameters. The PR adds plan_env/project_env to the constructors of PlanExecutionContext, ToolCallRouter, and ToolCallingRuntime, but no production construction site is modified in this diff. All existing callers still instantiate these objects without passing env values. This means the plumbing is in place, but unless a companion change at the orchestration/CLI layer actually passes these values when constructing the router and runtime, the bug remains latent in production.

   If the top-level wiring occurs in a separate PR (layered approach) or via a DI container, please clarify this in the PR description and link to the companion PR.

2. No new behavioral tests. The only test change is a signature fixup to 2 existing monkey-patched stubs (adding **_kwargs). There is no test that verifies the actual fix — e.g., constructing a ToolCallRouter(plan_env="container") and asserting the runner receives it. For a Priority/Critical bug fix, there must be at least one test proving the behavior change works end-to-end.

Minor Issues

3. **_kwargs in test stubs is pragmatic but fragile — it silently swallows any future keyword changes without failing. Consider explicitly accepting the new params instead.

4. No BDD scenario for the end-to-end project-level override path. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §Testing Philosophy: "Every coding task must include or update tests at multiple levels."

Action Items

• Clarify where the top-level wiring occurs (or add it to this PR)
• Add at least one test that constructs ToolCallRouter with project_env="container" and asserts the runner's execute() receives it
• Consider adding a BDD scenario for end-to-end project-level env override
• Replace **_kwargs with explicit parameter names in test stubs

## Review: REQUEST CHANGES The diff itself is clean, minimal, and well-structured — adding `plan_env`/`project_env` parameters to `PlanExecutionContext`, `ToolCallRouter`, and `ToolCallingRuntime`. The commit messages are excellent and the code follows existing patterns. However, there are two significant gaps. ### Blocking Issues 1. **No production caller passes the new parameters.** The PR adds `plan_env`/`project_env` to the **constructors** of `PlanExecutionContext`, `ToolCallRouter`, and `ToolCallingRuntime`, but **no production construction site is modified in this diff**. All existing callers still instantiate these objects without passing env values. This means the plumbing is in place, but unless a companion change at the orchestration/CLI layer actually passes these values when constructing the router and runtime, **the bug remains latent in production**. If the top-level wiring occurs in a separate PR (layered approach) or via a DI container, please clarify this in the PR description and link to the companion PR. 2. **No new behavioral tests.** The only test change is a signature fixup to 2 existing monkey-patched stubs (adding `**_kwargs`). There is no test that verifies the actual fix — e.g., constructing a `ToolCallRouter(plan_env="container")` and asserting the runner receives it. For a `Priority/Critical` bug fix, there must be at least one test proving the behavior change works end-to-end. ### Minor Issues 3. **`**_kwargs` in test stubs** is pragmatic but fragile — it silently swallows any future keyword changes without failing. Consider explicitly accepting the new params instead. 4. **No BDD scenario** for the end-to-end project-level override path. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §Testing Philosophy: *"Every coding task must include or update tests at multiple levels."* ### Action Items - [ ] Clarify where the top-level wiring occurs (or add it to this PR) - [ ] Add at least one test that constructs `ToolCallRouter` with `project_env="container"` and asserts the runner's `execute()` receives it - [ ] Consider adding a BDD scenario for end-to-end project-level env override - [ ] Replace `**_kwargs` with explicit parameter names in test stubs

freemo approved these changes 2026-03-27 17:10:04 +00:00

Dismissed

freemo left a comment

Copy link

Review: fix(cli): honour project-level execution-env-priority in resolution

Approved with comments. The code change is correct and minimal.

Issues to Address

1. Unrelated merge commits (Medium)
The branch contains 8 unrelated merge commits from master (LSP runtime, resource handler, plan lifecycle, etc.). Should be rebased to contain only the 2 relevant commits for a cleaner diff and review.

2. Missing integration tests (Medium)
The only test change fixes existing stubs to accept the new **_kwargs. No new test scenarios verify the actual precedence behavior end-to-end. At least one test that confirms project-level execution-env-priority is actually honored during tool execution would strengthen confidence.

What's Good

• Clean, minimal change: correctly threads plan_env/project_env through PlanExecutionContext → ToolCallingRuntime → ToolCallRouter → runner.execute().
• Type safety: all new parameters are str | None with None defaults, consistent with existing patterns.
• No new error paths introduced — parameters are simply threaded through.
• CHANGELOG entry references #1080.

Note

PRs #1135 and #1136 are related — #1135 adds the CLI flag and persistence, #1136 threads the value through execution. They should be merged in order: #1135 first, #1136 second.

## Review: fix(cli): honour project-level execution-env-priority in resolution **Approved with comments.** The code change is correct and minimal. ### Issues to Address **1. Unrelated merge commits (Medium)** The branch contains **8 unrelated merge commits** from master (LSP runtime, resource handler, plan lifecycle, etc.). Should be rebased to contain only the 2 relevant commits for a cleaner diff and review. **2. Missing integration tests (Medium)** The only test change fixes existing stubs to accept the new `**_kwargs`. No new test scenarios verify the actual precedence behavior end-to-end. At least one test that confirms project-level `execution-env-priority` is actually honored during tool execution would strengthen confidence. ### What's Good - Clean, minimal change: correctly threads `plan_env`/`project_env` through `PlanExecutionContext` → `ToolCallingRuntime` → `ToolCallRouter` → `runner.execute()`. - Type safety: all new parameters are `str | None` with `None` defaults, consistent with existing patterns. - No new error paths introduced — parameters are simply threaded through. - CHANGELOG entry references #1080. ### Note PRs #1135 and #1136 are related — #1135 adds the CLI flag and persistence, #1136 threads the value through execution. They should be merged in order: #1135 first, #1136 second.

freemo requested review from CoreRasurae 2026-03-28 21:28:06 +00:00

freemo requested changes 2026-03-28 23:21:59 +00:00

Dismissed

freemo left a comment

Copy link

Day 48 Planning Review — Bug Fix PR for #1080

The core fix (injecting project_env into the execution environment resolution chain) is architecturally correct. However, several issues must be resolved:

Blocking issues:

1. Two commits — Must be squashed into one. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, each PR should contain exactly one atomic commit.

2. Merge conflicts (mergeable: false) — Rebase required.

3. No milestone assigned — Set to v3.5.0 to match linked bug #1080.

4. Closing keyword format — Uses ISSUES CLOSED: #1080 (custom trailer) instead of Closes #1080. Forgejo may not auto-close the issue with the custom format. Add Closes #1080 to the PR body.

5. No new tests — As @freemo flagged in review #2706, no behavioral test proves the fix works. The only changes are fixing existing monkey-patched stubs. At minimum, add a test that verifies project_env reaches the resolver.

6. Dependency on #1135 — This PR requires #1135 to be merged first (confirmed by @freemo's review #2787). This should be documented as a blocking dependency in the PR description.

7. No @tdd_expected_fail removal — Author acknowledges the WF17 test suite doesn't exist. Acceptable if no TDD test exists for this bug.

Requested changes: Squash commits, rebase, set milestone, add Closes #1080, add behavioral test, document #1135 dependency.

**Day 48 Planning Review — Bug Fix PR for #1080** The core fix (injecting `project_env` into the execution environment resolution chain) is architecturally correct. However, several issues must be resolved: **Blocking issues:** 1. **Two commits** — Must be squashed into one. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, each PR should contain exactly one atomic commit. 2. **Merge conflicts** (`mergeable: false`) — Rebase required. 3. **No milestone assigned** — Set to v3.5.0 to match linked bug #1080. 4. **Closing keyword format** — Uses `ISSUES CLOSED: #1080` (custom trailer) instead of `Closes #1080`. Forgejo may not auto-close the issue with the custom format. Add `Closes #1080` to the PR body. 5. **No new tests** — As @freemo flagged in review #2706, no behavioral test proves the fix works. The only changes are fixing existing monkey-patched stubs. At minimum, add a test that verifies `project_env` reaches the resolver. 6. **Dependency on #1135** — This PR requires #1135 to be merged first (confirmed by @freemo's review #2787). This should be documented as a blocking dependency in the PR description. 7. **No `@tdd_expected_fail` removal** — Author acknowledges the WF17 test suite doesn't exist. Acceptable if no TDD test exists for this bug. **Requested changes:** Squash commits, rebase, set milestone, add `Closes #1080`, add behavioral test, document #1135 dependency.

freemo approved these changes 2026-03-30 04:19:54 +00:00

Dismissed

freemo left a comment

Copy link

Review: APPROVED

Well-written PR with clear root cause analysis and focused changes. The 5-file, 53-line change is surgically scoped.

Notes

• Good: The PR description transparently notes the missing WF17 E2E test and explains why.
• Good: Root cause is correctly identified — callers never passed project_env, not a resolver logic bug.
• Minor: The **_kwargs signature in test mock overrides is unusual but pragmatic for forward compatibility.
• The PlanExecutionContext additions (plan_env, project_env properties) are clean and well-documented.

## Review: APPROVED Well-written PR with clear root cause analysis and focused changes. The 5-file, 53-line change is surgically scoped. ### Notes - Good: The PR description transparently notes the missing WF17 E2E test and explains why. - Good: Root cause is correctly identified — callers never passed `project_env`, not a resolver logic bug. - Minor: The `**_kwargs` signature in test mock overrides is unusual but pragmatic for forward compatibility. - The `PlanExecutionContext` additions (`plan_env`, `project_env` properties) are clean and well-documented.

freemo requested changes 2026-03-30 04:48:41 +00:00

freemo left a comment

Copy link

Updated Review (Deep Pass): REQUEST CHANGES

My initial review approved this PR. The deep review reveals a significant gap.

New Finding: Zero New Test Coverage

This PR threads plan_env and project_env parameters through PlanExecutionContext -> ToolCallingRuntime -> ToolCallRouter -> ToolRunner.execute(), but includes no new BDD scenarios or Robot tests proving the resolver actually uses these values. The only test changes update existing mock signatures to accept **_kwargs for compatibility.

Per CONTRIBUTING.md §Multi-Level Testing Mandate: "Every coding task must include or update tests at multiple levels." This PR adds production logic (6 call sites passing plan_env/project_env) but zero new tests verifying the behavior. There should be at least:

1. A BDD scenario verifying project-level env overrides plan-level env at the correct precedence
2. A scenario verifying the resolver receives and uses both values

Previous finding still applies:

• The **_kwargs signature in test mocks is pragmatic for forward compatibility
• The PR description is well-written with clear root cause analysis
• router.py at 909 lines is a pre-existing 500-line violation

## Updated Review (Deep Pass): REQUEST CHANGES My initial review approved this PR. The deep review reveals a significant gap. ### New Finding: Zero New Test Coverage This PR threads `plan_env` and `project_env` parameters through `PlanExecutionContext` -> `ToolCallingRuntime` -> `ToolCallRouter` -> `ToolRunner.execute()`, but includes **no new BDD scenarios or Robot tests** proving the resolver actually uses these values. The only test changes update existing mock signatures to accept `**_kwargs` for compatibility. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §Multi-Level Testing Mandate: "Every coding task must include or update tests at multiple levels." This PR adds production logic (6 call sites passing `plan_env`/`project_env`) but zero new tests verifying the behavior. There should be at least: 1. A BDD scenario verifying project-level env overrides plan-level env at the correct precedence 2. A scenario verifying the resolver receives and uses both values ### Previous finding still applies: - The `**_kwargs` signature in test mocks is pragmatic for forward compatibility - The PR description is well-written with clear root cause analysis - `router.py` at 909 lines is a pre-existing 500-line violation

hamza.khyari force-pushed bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 from d709717105 to 11450c6e67 2026-03-30 11:04:02 +00:00 Compare

hamza.khyari force-pushed bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 from 11450c6e67 to 01400e8c43 2026-03-30 11:38:15 +00:00 Compare

hamza.khyari commented 2026-03-30 11:38:34 +00:00

Author

Member

Copy link

Self-Review: Production Path Analysis

Rebased onto master (01400e8c). All 99 affected Behave scenarios pass.

Critical Finding: Production Bypass

Deep trace of the production plan execute path reveals it does not use the tool-calling pipeline:

CLI plan execute
  → _get_plan_executor()          # builds PlanExecutor with LLMExecuteActor
  → PlanExecutor.run_execute()
    → _run_execute_with_stub()     # execution_context is None
      → LLMExecuteActor.execute()
        → llm.invoke()             # DIRECT LangChain LLM call
        → _parse_file_blocks()     # regex parse of text output
        → returns ExecuteResult

ToolRunner.execute(), ToolCallRouter, ToolCallingRuntime, and PlanExecutionContext are never instantiated in this path. The production execution goes through LLMExecuteActor which sends a prompt directly to the LLM and parses text output with regex.

What This Means for #1080

Path	Uses tool calling?	project_env threaded?
Production (LLMExecuteActor)	No	N/A — no env resolution occurs
Tool-calling pipeline (ToolCallRouter → ToolRunner)	Yes	Yes — this PR fixes it
Tests/benchmarks	Yes	Yes — verified by 4 BDD scenarios

This PR correctly fixes the tool-calling pipeline's project_env threading. When the tool-calling pipeline becomes the production path (replacing LLMExecuteActor), the fix will be active. Currently, the production plan execute path doesn't do tool calling or env resolution at all.

Recommendation

This PR should be merged as-is — the fix is correct for the tool-calling pipeline. A separate issue should track migrating the production plan execute path from LLMExecuteActor (direct LLM invoke) to the tool-calling pipeline (ToolCallingRuntime → ToolCallRouter → ToolRunner), at which point this fix becomes production-active.

## Self-Review: Production Path Analysis Rebased onto master (`01400e8c`). All 99 affected Behave scenarios pass. ### Critical Finding: Production Bypass Deep trace of the production `plan execute` path reveals it **does not use the tool-calling pipeline**: ``` CLI plan execute → _get_plan_executor() # builds PlanExecutor with LLMExecuteActor → PlanExecutor.run_execute() → _run_execute_with_stub() # execution_context is None → LLMExecuteActor.execute() → llm.invoke() # DIRECT LangChain LLM call → _parse_file_blocks() # regex parse of text output → returns ExecuteResult ``` `ToolRunner.execute()`, `ToolCallRouter`, `ToolCallingRuntime`, and `PlanExecutionContext` are **never instantiated** in this path. The production execution goes through `LLMExecuteActor` which sends a prompt directly to the LLM and parses text output with regex. ### What This Means for #1080 | Path | Uses tool calling? | project_env threaded? | |------|-------------------|----------------------| | **Production** (`LLMExecuteActor`) | No | N/A — no env resolution occurs | | **Tool-calling pipeline** (`ToolCallRouter` → `ToolRunner`) | Yes | **Yes** — this PR fixes it | | **Tests/benchmarks** | Yes | **Yes** — verified by 4 BDD scenarios | This PR correctly fixes the tool-calling pipeline's `project_env` threading. When the tool-calling pipeline becomes the production path (replacing `LLMExecuteActor`), the fix will be active. Currently, the production `plan execute` path doesn't do tool calling or env resolution at all. ### Recommendation This PR should be merged as-is — the fix is correct for the tool-calling pipeline. A separate issue should track migrating the production `plan execute` path from `LLMExecuteActor` (direct LLM invoke) to the tool-calling pipeline (`ToolCallingRuntime` → `ToolCallRouter` → `ToolRunner`), at which point this fix becomes production-active.

hamza.khyari force-pushed bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 from 01400e8c43 to cef18b7a0b 2026-03-30 12:11:33 +00:00 Compare

hamza.khyari force-pushed bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 from cef18b7a0b to 2207f03150 2026-03-31 10:40:31 +00:00 Compare

hamza.khyari scheduled this pull request to auto merge when all checks succeed 2026-03-31 10:43:49 +00:00

hamza.khyari force-pushed bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 from 2207f03150 to cd9cb9e889 2026-03-31 11:31:09 +00:00 Compare

hamza.khyari canceled auto merging this pull request when all checks succeed 2026-03-31 11:39:52 +00:00

hamza.khyari scheduled this pull request to auto merge when all checks succeed 2026-03-31 11:43:03 +00:00

hamza.khyari merged commit d27fb6d1f0 into master 2026-03-31 11:53:09 +00:00

hamza.khyari referenced this pull request from a commit 2026-03-31 11:53:11 +00:00

Merge pull request 'fix(cli): honour project-level execution-env-priority in resolution' (#1136) from bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 into master

hamza.khyari deleted branch bugfix/m8-exec-env-precedence-level2 2026-03-31 11:53:20 +00:00

Sign in to join this conversation.

Reviewers

No reviewers

CoreRasurae

freemo

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

v3.5.0

Projects

Clear projects

No items

No project

Assignees

Clear assignees

No assignees

hamza.khyari

2 participants

Notifications

Subscribe

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!1136

No description provided.