Skip to content

fix(scripts): repoint checks at the .adoc files that exist - #89

Merged
hyperpolymath merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/repoint-scripts-at-adoc
Aug 26, 2026
Merged

fix(scripts): repoint checks at the .adoc files that exist#89
hyperpolymath merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/repoint-scripts-at-adoc

Conversation

@hyperpolymath

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

The .md.adoc documentation migration moved these files but never updated the scripts that read them, so every check naming a .md has been operating on a file that no longer exists.

Repointed: CONTRIBUTING.md->CONTRIBUTING.adoc MAINTAINERS.md->MAINTAINERS.adoc README.md->README.adoc

Three failure modes were in play across the estate, all fixed by the same change:

shape effect
check "X.md exists" "[ -f X.md ]" hard fail — can never pass
[ -f X.md ] && ((doc_score++)) silently scores lower
if [ -f X.md ]; then …greps… fi silent skip — the block never runs, so the gate reports success by not checking

Labels are repointed too, so failure messages name the file actually inspected. Where a script did git add … X.md, that is fixed as well — it would have failed at release time.

Only tokens whose .adoc twin exists here were rewritten; anything without a twin was left for separate triage.

Found by an estate-wide sweep of 454 repos: 56 such checks across 18 repos. Same class as hyperpolymath/Axiom.jl#82.

The .md -> .adoc documentation migration moved these files but never updated
the scripts that READ them, so every check naming a .md has been operating on
a file that no longer exists.

Repointed: CONTRIBUTING.md->CONTRIBUTING.adoc MAINTAINERS.md->MAINTAINERS.adoc README.md->README.adoc

Three failure modes were in play across the estate, all fixed by the same
change:
  * hard fail   - 'check "X.md exists" "[ -f X.md ]"' can never pass
  * wrong score - '[ -f X.md ] && ((doc_score++))' silently scores lower
  * SILENT SKIP - 'if [ -f X.md ]; then ...greps... fi' skips the whole block,
                  so the checks inside never run and the gate reports success
                  by not checking at all

Human-readable labels are repointed too, so failure messages name the file that
is actually inspected. Where a script did 'git add ... X.md', that is fixed as
well - it would have failed at release time.

Only tokens whose .adoc twin exists in this repository were rewritten; anything
without a twin was left untouched for separate triage.

Found by an estate-wide sweep of 454 repos: 56 such checks across 18 repos.
Same defect class as hyperpolymath/Axiom.jl#82.
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Review Change Stack

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 5eade76e-43ef-4e12-a68e-2eb3d307e227

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a094b65 and 016d5e9.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • scripts/check-rsr-compliance.sh

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

📜 Recent review details
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout. (1)
  • GitHub Check: Codacy Static Code Analysis
🔇 Additional comments (1)
scripts/check-rsr-compliance.sh (1)

76-82: LGTM!

Also applies to: 202-217


📝 Walkthrough

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Updated documentation and compliance checks to use .adoc files.
    • Updated offline-first validation to check README.adoc for cache and offline terminology.

Walkthrough

The compliance script now references README.adoc, CONTRIBUTING.adoc, and MAINTAINERS.adoc for documentation, TPCF, and offline-first checks.

Changes

RSR compliance checks

Layer / File(s) Summary
Update documentation check paths
scripts/check-rsr-compliance.sh
Documentation, TPCF, and offline-first checks now use the repository's .adoc files.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 016d5

This is a localized documentation-path update with no actionable merge-blocking risk remaining beyond normal checks and review.

Suggested reviewers: metadatastician

Poem

A rabbit checks each document line

.adoc paths now align
TPCF follows the trail
Offline checks no longer fail
Compliance hops into the sign.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5
✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly states that the scripts now reference the existing .adoc files. It accurately summarises the main change.
Description check ✅ Passed The description directly explains the .md to .adoc migration and the script updates. It covers the affected files and failure modes.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 1…
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 1 files.

✨ Finishing Touches
📝 Generate docstrings
  • Create stacked PR
  • Commit on current branch

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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@sonarqubecloud

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@codacy-production

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Up to standards ✅

🟢 Issues 0 issues

Results:
0 new issues

View in Codacy

AI Reviewer: first review requested successfully. AI can make mistakes. Always validate suggestions.

Run reviewer

TIP This summary will be updated as you push new changes.

@gitar-bot

gitar-bot Bot commented Aug 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Important

You are using the Gitar free plan. Upgrade to unlock code review, CI analysis, auto-apply, custom automations, and more.

Gitar

@codacy-production codacy-production Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

The documentation migration from Markdown to AsciiDoc is correctly reflected in the compliance script updates. The implementation satisfies the primary acceptance criteria for file path updates and content verification. Codacy reports that the changes are up to standards, with no new issues or complexity increases. While the logic appears correct, there are currently no automated unit or integration tests verifying the script's response to the new file extensions.

Test suggestions

  • Verify compliance script correctly identifies README.adoc, CONTRIBUTING.adoc, and MAINTAINERS.adoc when they exist.
  • Verify content grep logic correctly matches keywords ('perimeter', 'cache', 'offline') inside the new .adoc files.
  • Verify failure messages correctly name the .adoc files when checks fail or warn.
Prompt proposal for missing tests
Consider implementing these tests if applicable:
1. Verify compliance script correctly identifies README.adoc, CONTRIBUTING.adoc, and MAINTAINERS.adoc when they exist.
2. Verify content grep logic correctly matches keywords ('perimeter', 'cache', 'offline') inside the new .adoc files.
3. Verify failure messages correctly name the .adoc files when checks fail or warn.

TIP Improve review quality by adding custom instructions
TIP How was this review? Give us feedback

@hyperpolymath
hyperpolymath merged commit bc9601d into main Aug 26, 2026
22 of 25 checks passed
@hyperpolymath
hyperpolymath deleted the fix/repoint-scripts-at-adoc branch August 26, 2026 16:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant