Skip to content

test(docs): pin protocol-member-order in conventions toctree - #2492

Closed
JarryShaw wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/conventions-toctree-pin
Closed

JarryShaw wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/conventions-toctree-pin

Conversation

@JarryShaw

@JarryShaw JarryShaw commented Oct 31, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Please follow the guide below

  • You will be asked some questions, please read them carefully and answer honestly

  • Put an x into all the boxes [ ] relevant to your pull request (like that [x])

  • Use Preview tab to see how your pull request will actually look like

  • Searched for similar pull requests

  • Followed the coding style (make pylint, make mypy, make isort)

  • make test passes, and a test case covers the change

  • Added a changelog entry under docs/source/changelog/ and regenerated CHANGELOG.md, if the change is user-visible

What is the purpose of your pull request?

Tick the commit type your subject line carries.

  • fix — corrects a defect
  • feat — adds a feature
  • perf — changes performance, not behaviour
  • refactor — changes neither behaviour nor performance
  • test — tests only
  • docs — documentation only
  • ci — workflows or build tooling
  • release — bumps the version or rolls up a distribution
  • chore — anything else
  • const — regenerates constant or registry tables, members keeping their numeric values

Description of your pull request and other information

Adds protocol-member-order to ANCHORS in tests/project/test_conventions_doc_claims.py, so the expected toctree matches docs/source/contributing/conventions/index.rst. The list stays strict, so a missing or extra entry still fails. Test-only, no changelog entry; make test was not run in full and isort already fails on main.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added the review: pending No verdict for the current head - never reviewed, or the head moved since the last one label Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw moved this to In review in PyPCAPKit Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet and removed review: pending No verdict for the current head - never reviewed, or the head moved since the last one labels Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

NEEDS CHANGES (Sonnet, 6c2712771). The toctree pin matches index.rst; the strict equality is unchanged; 34 passed on the head.

  • PR body: the claim that two PhaseTwoRemainderTests still fail does not reproduce on head or main; drop it.
  • test_conventions_doc_claims.py ~L108: comment line is 109 columns; re-wrap to 86 or less.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: needs-changes Cross-review at the current head says changes are required; see the verdict comment and removed review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet labels Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Held: Actions queue at 47 (above the hold line). The PR body and comment-width fix dispatches when the queue drops below 40.

ANCHORS lacked the protocol-member-order page that the index toctree
lists, failing test_the_index_toctree_lists_every_page_in_order.
@JarryShaw
JarryShaw force-pushed the fix/conventions-toctree-pin branch from 6c27127 to 2e934cf Compare October 31, 2026 05:44
@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: pending No verdict for the current head - never reviewed, or the head moved since the last one review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet and removed review: needs-changes Cross-review at the current head says changes are required; see the verdict comment review: pending No verdict for the current head - never reviewed, or the head moved since the last one labels Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

NEEDS CHANGES (Sonnet, 2e934cf7b). The code change is correct: the diff is one ANCHORS addition plus the comment, the strict equality holds, and the toctree matches.

  • PR body: remove the PhaseTwo sentence in the Description; it is still there.
  • PR body: 24 non-blank lines; trim to 15 (the Description is three paragraphs).

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: needs-changes Cross-review at the current head says changes are required; see the verdict comment test Pull requests that add or correct tests (test: subject prefix) and removed review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet labels Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Local-only commit 6c27127 is a sibling of origin 2e934cf (same parent 3e2da71, same change), so pushing it means a non-fast-forward. Nothing to push. Blocker: the PR body is still over the 15-line limit; the owner decides whether to cut it.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added the needs: decision Waiting on the maintainer to decide — not blocked by other work label Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw moved this from In review to Needs decision in PyPCAPKit Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Owner ruling, paraphrased: the 15-line PR body limit is a recommendation, not a hard limit. The body length no longer blocks this PR. The local sibling commit 6c2712771 is redundant with origin 2e934cf7b and is dropped. Verdict to be re-checked on the current head.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: pending No verdict for the current head - never reviewed, or the head moved since the last one and removed review: needs-changes Cross-review at the current head says changes are required; see the verdict comment needs: decision Waiting on the maintainer to decide — not blocked by other work labels Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

GOOD TO GO (Sonnet, 2e934cf7b). Same one-line ANCHORS change, toctree order matches. Narrow test 34 passed, 1 skipped. This change is now also on main as eaddd9061, so this PR is redundant. Close it, or I will, on your word.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: good-to-go Cross-review at the current head says ready; CI state is separate and removed review: pending No verdict for the current head - never reviewed, or the head moved since the last one labels Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw moved this from Needs decision to In review in PyPCAPKit Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Decision needed: close this PR, or keep it. Options: (a) close it, since main eaddd9061 already carries the same ANCHORS line; (b) keep it open and rebase onto main so it becomes empty. Recommendation: (a) close. Its required check reads red only because a leg was cancelled by my drain, and the change is already on main.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added the needs: decision Waiting on the maintainer to decide — not blocked by other work label Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

take (a)

@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Ruling applied: close this PR as redundant. Main eaddd9061 already carries the same ANCHORS line, so nothing is lost. Closing now and clearing the needs: decision label.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw removed review: good-to-go Cross-review at the current head says ready; CI state is separate needs: decision Waiting on the maintainer to decide — not blocked by other work labels Oct 31, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw closed this Oct 31, 2026
@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from In review to Done in PyPCAPKit Oct 31, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

test Pull requests that add or correct tests (test: subject prefix)

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant