Record that the engine's spawn signal test now fails in CI, not just under local load - #160
Conversation
The deferred entry had two sightings, both on a laptop running two suites at once, and read as a local-load annoyance. It failed on a GitHub runner during #158, a PR that changes no engine file, and passed on a re-run of the same commit. That makes it a test that reddens the shared Test check on unrelated work, which teaches people to re-run a red check rather than read it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: willbot <w.a.madden+machine@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Will Madden <madden@prisma.io>
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 47 minutes You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
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. Comment |
commit: |
packages/cli-engine/tests/spawn-real-child.test.ts's "native Ctrl-C reaches the child through the shared process group" failed on a GitHub runner during #158 — a PR that changes no engine file — and passed on a re-run of the same commit and locally in isolation.deferred.mdalready had this test recorded with two sightings, both on a laptop running the engine and CLI suites at once, which read as a local-load annoyance. A CI sighting is a different thing: it reddens the sharedTestcheck on unrelated work, and a check that goes red for reasons unrelated to the change teaches people to re-run it rather than read it.This updates the existing entry rather than adding a second one. No code change — the fix the entry already proposes (wait for the child to report it is ready for the signal, rather than for a marker it writes too early) belongs to whoever next touches the engine.
The paragraph is unwrapped in passing, per the repo's markdown convention.