fix(workbench): bind finding excerpts to selected source paths - #636
Conversation
|
@codex review |
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 566f5c4de7
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 8ff61b6145
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| if process.stdout.read(1): | ||
| if process.poll() is None: | ||
| process.kill() | ||
| return False |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a repository contains any active replacement ref—even one for an unrelated historical object—this branch suppresses every source excerpt. All subsequent object reads already pass --no-replace-objects, which Git documents as disabling replacement refs, so the refs cannot alter the tree or blob being displayed; probing for their mere presence introduces an unnecessary output regression for repositories that legitimately use git replace.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L19-L22
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
|
@codex review |
|
@codex security review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Delightful! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
|
@codex review |
|
@codex security review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 03af8b7137
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
|
@codex review |
|
@codex security review |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6fd4128627
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
|
@codex security review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff. Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 89207b3ca4
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| child = node.children.get(component) | ||
| if child is None: | ||
| return kinds if authorized else None |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On a case-insensitive checkout, a valid selected scope can use different casing or Unicode composition from Git's canonical spelling (for example, selecting SRC when the tree and finding location use src/file.py). The scope is persisted with the requested spelling, but this exact children.get(component) lookup rejects the canonical finding path before tree matching, so otherwise valid findings silently lose their source excerpts on Windows and similar filesystems. Preserve or resolve the canonical tree spelling when building the scope index, or compare scope components using the checkout's filesystem identity.
AGENTS.md reference: sdk/typescript/AGENTS.md:L27-L27
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
Show finding excerpts only from the immutable source paths selected for that scan. Preserve the selection when results are reopened instead of deriving it from the current checkout.
Changes
Testing
Four affected suites, seed 636: 168 passed, 12 platform skips. Both disabled-replacement regressions failed before the fix and passed after it through real cache upgrades from 0.1.60, 0.1.74 and 0.1.78.
The existing-column migration regression failed before the fix; predecessor and existing-column cases now pass, including repeated application and preservation of migration history.
Types, generated models, formatting, build, Ruff, Python 3.10 grammar and migration-prefix verification passed.
Fresh 282-entry npm artifact check and full installed smoke passed, including 118 plugin files, public import, NodeNext consumer, CLI, credential locking and a nested Codex worker.
Adjacent committed-diff suites: 102 passed and one empty-output Git probe failed; its exact isolated retry passed. Full suite, native Windows and live model execution were not rerun. Current-head CI is left for a separate pass.
Final main refresh (
fd98a90): package 0.1.21 includes the MCP launcher-permission fix; SDK implementation and bundled payload are unchanged. Types/model generation, formatting, build, 28 focused tests, static artifact verification and full installed-package smoke passed, including MCP initialization. CI was not awaited.Risk and rollout
No public CLI change. Excerpts remain optional and fail closed when source authority cannot be established. Keep #631 as the base; this alternative source-scope implementation overlaps #488. Active replacement views are deliberately still omitted pending a matching-view contract. Existing review discussions remain open; no approval or PR merge is included.
Public disclosure review
Historical commit contact metadata and restricted links in automated comments remain, so the second attestation is unchecked. This update uses synthetic fixtures and a GitHub noreply commit identity; other authors' comments are unchanged.