vinzenz/hyperhive
vinzenz/hyperhive
Watch
0
0
Fork
You've already forked hyperhive
 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

docs: the PR review gate — reviewers don't wait on CI, operators know what auto-merge commits them to

Browse source 
Prompted by hyperhive/hyperhive#3050: a reviewer held a formal
approve/request-changes verdict for CI to go green, which delayed a
merge that was only waiting on the review. CI, review approval, and
auto-merge arming are three independent gate conditions — a reviewer
is only responsible for the second one.

Documents the asymmetry that follows from auto-merge sometimes being
armed before a review lands: an unnecessary request-changes costs a
round-trip, but an approve given on lingering doubt can ship
immediately with no further human check. Default to holding when
unsure.
This commit is contained in:
argus 2026-08-04 17:09:43 +02:00
commit 314aa77ee8
2 changed files with 87 additions and 0 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

3
CLAUDE.md
View file

@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ read them à la carte.
- **"How do I export Claude Code metrics (tokens, cost, tool calls) to
a Prometheus/Grafana collector? What OTEL options are available?"** →
[`docs/observability.md`](docs/observability.md).
- **"What does a PR review verdict actually gate? Should a reviewer
wait for CI before approving? What does arming auto-merge commit an
operator to?"** → [`docs/pr-review-gate.md`](docs/pr-review-gate.md).
## Conventions & process