mirror of
https://github.com/QwenLM/qwen-code.git
synced 2026-07-09 17:19:02 +00:00
41c405b3bf
Suggestion-level findings were routed to a single updatable issue comment (the "suggestion summary") while only Critical findings became inline review comments. That split traded away two things that turned out to matter more than the convergence it bought: - An issue comment has no lifecycle. GitHub folds an inline review thread away as Outdated once the author edits the line it is anchored to, so an addressed finding removes itself from the page. The summary comment just sits in the PR conversation forever; PATCHing it to "all addressed" replaces its content but not the comment. The mechanism meant to prevent clutter was the clutter. - A Markdown table cannot carry a one-click fix. GitHub renders a ```suggestion fence as an applicable change only inside a review comment on a diff line. Suggestion findings are exactly the mechanical, localized cleanups that benefit most from one-click apply, so the split withheld the feature from the findings that needed it most. Both severities now post as inline comments, distinguished by a **[Critical]** or **[Suggestion]** body prefix. The `qwen review post-suggestions` subcommand and its plumbing are removed. Follow-on changes required by the reroute: - pr-context: the "Previous suggestion summary" section is gone. Legacy summary comments are still recognised so they stay out of "Already discussed", but the exclusion is now marker-only rather than author-gated. The author check missed summaries posted by the *other* identity: /review runs as a maintainer locally and as qwen-code-ci-bot in CI, and roughly half of the last 60 PRs carry a bot-authored summary. Those leaked into "Already discussed" and told the review agents not to re-report the findings listed there. The check originally guarded promotion into a trusted rendering section; that section no longer exists, so it only gated exclusion, where a third party embedding the marker merely hides their own comment. - qwen-autofix: the workflow filters "suggestion summaries" out of the autofix bot's actionable queue, but only on the issue-comment channel. With Suggestions now inline, they entered the unfiltered inline channel and the bot would apply non-blocking recommendations and spend a review round on them. The inline channel now applies the same gate, keyed on the **[Suggestion]** prefix plus the /review footer so a human quoting the prefix stays actionable. - Step 7 gains a 422 fallback. Create Review is all-or-nothing, so one Suggestion anchored outside the diff would take the Critical findings down with it — a risk that did not exist when Suggestions travelled on a line-agnostic issue comment. GitHub's 422 does not name the offending entry, so the model rechecks anchors against the diff, relocates failing Criticals into the body, discards failing Suggestions, and degrades to an all-prose review rather than posting nothing. COMMENT reviews now always carry a one-line body: an empty body is only known to be accepted alongside inline comments on REQUEST_CHANGES, and a Suggestion- only review is the common case for a clean PR. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| acp-bridge | ||
| audio-capture | ||
| channels | ||
| chrome-extension | ||
| cli | ||
| core | ||
| cua-driver | ||
| desktop | ||
| mobile-mcp | ||
| sdk-java | ||
| sdk-python | ||
| sdk-typescript | ||
| vscode-ide-companion | ||
| web-shell | ||
| web-templates | ||
| webui | ||
| zed-extension | ||