| Filename | Latest commit message | Latest commit date |
|---|---|---|
37f5bda4ba
All checks were successful
standards workspaces build + test / jouleclaw-rs (pull_request) Successful in 11m39s
standards workspaces build + test / aac-rs (pull_request) Successful in 4m36s
standards workspaces build + test / joule-code-rs (pull_request) Successful in 2m34s
standards workspaces build + test / joulecontract-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m17s
standards workspaces build + test / map-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m27s
standards workspaces build + test / mesh-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m25s
standards workspaces build + test / openpay (pull_request) Successful in 2m56s
joule-code conformance gate / Build + round-trip C1-C4 vectors (pull_request) Successful in 2m0s
standards workspaces build + test / arl-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m11s
standards workspaces build + test / eoc-rs (pull_request) Successful in 2m1s
standards workspaces build + test / jcp-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m32s
standards workspaces build + test / joule-ui-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m11s
standards workspaces build + test / joulehook-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m12s
standards workspaces build + test / proof-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m16s
standards workspaces build + test / sense-rs (pull_request) Successful in 1m18s
standards workspaces build + test / sandbox-rs (pull_request) Successful in 2m18s
workflow hygiene / every workflow supersedes its own queue (pull_request) Successful in 4s
standards workspaces build + test / jouledesk-rs (pull_request) Successful in 5m22s
standards workspaces build + test / smart-byte-rs (pull_request) Successful in 3m48s
standards workspaces build + test / macOS energy backends (pull_request) Successful in 8m7s
The commit before this one (revived from #97) added a note explaining why a missing `conformance:` key does not mean a standard's pack is unchecked. Its reasoning is right and its mechanism was wrong: it said the checking is done "by a `tests/pack.rs` in each conformance crate". Several crates do use that name, but it is a convention — some read the pack from a test named something else, and some from another crate entirely. That matters because the wrong mechanism invites the wrong audit. Counting files named `tests/pack.rs` and finding crates without one looks like a coverage gap and is not one; I did exactly that earlier today and was about to report three standards as unchecked before a note from the last time it happened stopped me. So the comment now names the question — which tests read the published bytes — and the grep that answers it. No count in the text on purpose: any "N of M conformance crates" would be stale by the next crate added, and a stale number in a comment is how the first wrong conclusion got its confidence. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]> |
||
| .. | ||
| conformance.yml | ||
| energy-hardware.yml | ||
| joule-code-conformance.yml | ||
| jouleclaw-public-surface-documented.yml | ||
| no-vanity-metrics.yml | ||
| standards-build.yml | ||
| wai-byte-equality.yml | ||
| wai-conformance.yml | ||
| wai-energy-receipts.yml | ||
| wai-formal-verification.yml | ||
| wai-http.yml | ||
| wai-jpegai-e2e.yml | ||
| wai-neural-e2e.yml | ||
| wai-neural-gates.yml | ||
| wai-ops.yml | ||
| wai-pack.yml | ||
| wai-section-refs.yml | ||
| wai-sota-vectors.yml | ||
| wai-web-wasm.yml | ||
| workflow-hygiene.yml | ||