Repository navigation
quest: plan keying review sessions by upstream branch - #485
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. Next included review available in 25 minutes. View limit details
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ℹ️ No critical issues — one minor suggestion inline.
Reviewed changes — plan-only PR: one new quest file plus its README row; all factual claims checked directly against src/cli/review.ts and src/runner/workspace.ts.
- New quest
[S] Review sessions keyed by upstream branch(quest/m0/review-session-key.md) — keys aquest reviewsession by the local branch's upstream branch name instead of the local branch name, so a temporary branch tracking the PR branch continues that PR's session; excludes an upstream that is the review's base soorigin/main-tracking branches don't collapse into onemainsession. - README row in
quest/m0/README.md— the quest at its chosen rank, next to Reviewer usage limits.
Verification: sessionBranch and sessionFile behave as the quest's Plan states (src/cli/review.ts:872, src/cli/review.ts:854), the session key is indeed named before the default base resolves (review.ts:898 vs fetchBase at review.ts:832-849), and the runner's kix-review/* branches have no upstream, so they keep keying by their own name (src/runner/workspace.ts:397-407). quest check passes (71 documents).
glm-5.3-flash | 𝕏
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…sion-key # Conflicts: # quest/m0/README.md

Plans
quest/m0/review-session-key.md, the follow-up moq-dev/quest#474 suggested. Iterate agents on moq-dev/quest#464, moq-dev/quest#469, moq-dev/quest#472, and moq-dev/quest#474 reviewed from temporary local branches because another worktree held the PR branch. Sincequest reviewkeys sessions by the checked-out branch name, each started a new session, which resets the design checkpoint, or later resumed the wrong one.Changes
[S] Review sessions keyed by upstream branchin m0, ranked after Reviewer usage limits.origin/maintrack it by default (23 local branches in the maintainer's clone, this PR's own included), so keying them by upstream would merge them all into onemainsession. This refines the implementation of the decided rule below; the decision itself is unchanged.Decisions
Settled with the maintainer in /quest-complete on 2026-11-04:
Review
Skipped on head
cb07d3406dc14b7a7f12e5150fa1fc7d8a185439. The changes since the reviewed head are trivial.6efcd769turns one bare PR number inquest/m0/review-session-key.mdinto a link.cb07d340mergesorigin/main, resolving aquest/m0/README.mdconflict wheremaindeleted the neighboringwaiting-draftsrow. The PR still adds that one row, ranked after Reviewer usage limits.main's changes tosrc/cli/review.tsonly renamegitOutputtogit, so the plan's description ofsessionBranchandsessionFilestill holds.just check,just test, andquest check --base origin/mainpass oncb07d340.Previous round: Codex
gpt-6.1-sol(effortmedium, asquest reviewreported) viaquest review --base origin/main, round 1 on headb0899869705fec1076b192ffb908b7d190e66650, had no findings. Before that round, Claude Opus 5.5 checked the plan againstsrc/cli/review.ts(sessionBranch,sessionFile). Sessions are keyed by--branchorgit symbolic-ref --short HEADand hashed into<git-common-dir>/quest/review/<digest>.json. A detachedHEADalready requires--branch, so the plan's facts hold. That check found one gap, fixed inb0899869: the decided "upstream name when it has one" rule would key every branch that tracksorigin/mainasmain. The quest's implementation guidance now excludes an upstream that is the base branch, and notes thatreviewcurrently names the session before it resolves the default base.Pullfrog on
b0899869:#474onquest/m0/review-session-key.md:17was still bare. Fixed in6efcd769. The PR number is now a link, written by hand because the suggested patch covered only line 17 and would have duplicated the start of line 18.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
(Written by Claude Opus 5.5)