Skip to content

feat(queen): --skip-citation-only, so a bulk run is not limited to specs #4639

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
gHashTag merged 1 commit into from
Sep 23, 2026
Merged

feat(queen): --skip-citation-only, so a bulk run is not limited to specs #4639

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 8 additions & 0 deletions docs/now/2026-09-23-boundary-drafts-for-the-code-issues-too.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
# NOW -- boundary drafts for the code issues too, and none for the citations (2026-09-23)

## 167 of the 553 unreachable issues now carry a draft (Closes #4638)

- `--specs-only` covered the 103 issues naming a `.t27`. 64 more name code but no spec and are just as draftable; the run had no way to include them without also including the third group.
- That third group -- 71 issues -- names **only** a path under `docs/`, and those drafts are the ones most likely to be wrong: a document is quoted far more often than it is edited. #4122 and #4115 both name `docs/audit/inngest-improvement-plan-2026-09-13.md`, the thing they cite rather than the thing they change.
- `--skip-citation-only` drops an issue whose *every* path is under `docs/`. One naming a document **and** a code path is still drafted, because there the document is context and the code is the work.
- Run over the board: **167 issues now carry a boundary draft**, and a re-run posts nothing. The remaining 315 name no path at all -- there is nothing to draft from, and a guess there would be the wrong boundary the tool exists to avoid.
9 changes: 9 additions & 0 deletions tools/queen/propose_boundary.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -224,6 +224,13 @@ def main() -> int:
)
parser.add_argument("--issue", type=int)
parser.add_argument("--self-test", action="store_true")
parser.add_argument(
"--skip-citation-only",
action="store_true",
help="skip an issue whose every path is under docs/. Those are the "
"drafts most likely to be wrong - a document is quoted far more often "
"than it is edited - so a bulk run should leave them to a person",
)
parser.add_argument(
"--specs-only",
action="store_true",
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -254,6 +261,8 @@ def main() -> int:
continue
if args.specs_only and not any(p.endswith(".t27") for p in paths):
continue
if args.skip_citation_only and all(p.startswith("docs/") for p in paths):
continue
drafted += 1
text = proposal(paths)
print(f"\n#{row['number']} {row.get('title','')[:70]}")
Expand Down
Loading