refactor: consolidate the production workflow runtime - #40
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: 3e8662f66b
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".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 38401ae8fe
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".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 4b4ffac0d8
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".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: c6759514af
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".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 072e38aac4
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".
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d78c35db05
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".
| build.set_defaults( | ||
| func=_adapt_errors( | ||
| lambda args: source_build_command(args, root, original_build), | ||
| error_factory, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a chapter is marked translated and has a nonempty artifact but lacks translation_acceptance, book.py build <slug> --format epub --allow-unreviewed still succeeds and writes an EPUB. These lines install the new workspace gate, but register_epub_commands() subsequently routes EPUB requests directly to epub_build_command(), whose preflight never calls translation_acceptance_errors(). Fresh evidence relative to the previous acceptance-gate comment is that Markdown builds now reject this state while the EPUB path still bypasses the gate; apply the same admission check to EPUB builds.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L48-L50
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| for resolution in review_manager.resolve_all(progress, metadata): | ||
| review_states_by_number[resolution.chapter_number] = resolution.state |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For a current-schema chapter whose lifecycle is translated but whose translation_acceptance is absent, this resolution records the artifact as merely missing review evidence and leaves status valid, so resume dispatches a Reviewer. The newly added _require_current_translation_acceptance() then rejects review-record, making the recommended operation impossible to complete. Treat this state as invalid or route it back through Translator acceptance before scheduling review.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L48-L50
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Goal
Consolidate Book Translator around one supported production workflow. Remove legacy migration/runtime compatibility and development-era Workflow v2 design artifacts while preserving the current claims/review/finalize/storage behavior and making integrity gates explicit.
Intended result
docs/ARCHITECTURE.md;Older workspace shapes are intentionally not resumed through a parallel legacy production runtime; they must be converted outside the current runtime before use.
Verification
Exact PR head:
d78c35db0559dff1dd2f072e6d9f1385d715fef2GitHub Actions run:
34977341347104408329686: 292 tests, OK104408330103: 292 tests, OKtest_resume_review_finalize_report_and_epub_build_end_to_end: OK on both matricescheckout@v5,setup-python@v6) used; no Node 20 deprecation warningBase
mainbefore merge:dca1e7db6974d5c4354e4850ecf82b42cda06f42.No deploy is part of this PR. Historical PR #36 remains intentionally unmerged.