Polish Private Context output and receipt closure - #35
Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 24c698d21a
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| : [ | ||
| `Mixed context: @${terminalSafe(result.subject)} included ${String(result.repositorySelection.analyzedRepositories)} selected private repos.`, | ||
| `Mixed context: @${terminalSafe(result.subject)} included ${selectedPrivateRepositoryText(result)}.`, | ||
| `${privateQualitySampleText(result)}.`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When Private Context belongs to a participant with a long but valid GitHub handle, the additional quality-sample line can make the mandatory disclosure plus canonical command exceed 280 characters. For two 39-character handles and maximum bounded sample counts, these required lines are 296 characters, so renderX reaches its existing overflow throw and the CLI returns a generic internal error for --private-context --share x; provide a shorter disclosure fallback rather than making this valid invocation fail.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| ["ci-repositories", "sustained-repositories"].includes(receipt.metric), | ||
| ) | ||
| .map((receipt) => receipt.claim), | ||
| `${privateQualitySampleText(input.privateContext)}.`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When no supported private source qualifies, status is insufficient, so the preceding ternary branch bypasses this newly added sample summary entirely. As a result, HTML and SVG are the only updated ordinary mixed-context surfaces that omit the repository/file/coverage scope in this common limitation case, while terminal, card, and share output still show the zero-sized sample; add the summary to the insufficient branch as well.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Closes the v0.4.0 Private Context presentation defects without changing scoring, public winner selection, evidence, or private data boundaries.
Key changes:
Verification:
Publication remains separately gated; this PR does not publish npm or create a release.