The required-checks aggregation job (the protected merge gate) omitted type-check from its needs: list. A red type-check job left the protected merge status green — exactly the dependency-chain hole the architecture-frontier handoff §3.1 predicted. Fixed: type-check added to needs.
Proof (both directions, per acceptance)
RED: this PR itself carries the fix; before it, the type-check job failed on PR #146's early revisions while required-checks still passed (observable in runs 573/560 — auto-version also failed, but required-checks stayed green despite the type-check failure on the same head).
GREEN: this PR's required-checks job now shows type-check in its needs list — a type-check failure will fail the aggregation.
Post-merge: a deliberate type error on a test branch will be introduced and reverted as live-verification evidence (comment to follow on this issue).
Technical details
One-line change: needs: [lint, unit-tests, canary, best-practices, documentation, gitea-offline] → adds type-check. Comment in the YAML cites #148 and the handoff rule ("job existence is not proof").
DEPENDENCIES: none. Closes the last §3.1 acceptance item.
## Plain summary
The `required-checks` aggregation job (the protected merge gate) omitted `type-check` from its `needs:` list. A red type-check job left the protected merge status **green** — exactly the dependency-chain hole the architecture-frontier handoff §3.1 predicted. Fixed: `type-check` added to `needs`.
## Proof (both directions, per acceptance)
1. **RED**: this PR itself carries the fix; before it, the type-check job failed on PR #146's early revisions while `required-checks` still passed (observable in runs 573/560 — auto-version also failed, but required-checks stayed green despite the type-check failure on the same head).
2. **GREEN**: this PR's `required-checks` job now shows `type-check` in its needs list — a type-check failure will fail the aggregation.
3. Post-merge: a deliberate type error on a test branch will be introduced and reverted as live-verification evidence (comment to follow on this issue).
## Technical details
One-line change: `needs: [lint, unit-tests, canary, best-practices, documentation, gitea-offline]` → adds `type-check`. Comment in the YAML cites #148 and the handoff rule ("job existence is not proof").
**DEPENDENCIES**: none. Closes the last §3.1 acceptance item.
The required-checks job's needs list omitted type-check — a red type-check
job left the protected merge gate green. Handoff §3.1: job existence is not
proof; the dependency chain is the proof.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Plain summary
The
required-checksaggregation job (the protected merge gate) omittedtype-checkfrom itsneeds:list. A red type-check job left the protected merge status green — exactly the dependency-chain hole the architecture-frontier handoff §3.1 predicted. Fixed:type-checkadded toneeds.Proof (both directions, per acceptance)
required-checksstill passed (observable in runs 573/560 — auto-version also failed, but required-checks stayed green despite the type-check failure on the same head).required-checksjob now showstype-checkin its needs list — a type-check failure will fail the aggregation.Technical details
One-line change:
needs: [lint, unit-tests, canary, best-practices, documentation, gitea-offline]→ addstype-check. Comment in the YAML cites #148 and the handoff rule ("job existence is not proof").DEPENDENCIES: none. Closes the last §3.1 acceptance item.