Skip to content

Validate library guards with default and consensus features - #307

Merged
matrixarkai merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
test/feature-aware-library-guards
Oct 28, 2026
Merged

matrixarkai merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
test/feature-aware-library-guards

Conversation

@matrixarkai

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

The batch-read test expected metadata-head deduplication after page IDs had already been deduplicated by the coordinator. It now expects zero additional coalescing and cache hits while preserving checks for physical reads, quorum verification, payloads and duplicate direct head requests. The readiness test now expects the existing version-77 format and explicitly rejects a damaged checksum and an unsupported expected format.

The workflow-name guard previously required optional consensus tests to exist in a default-feature harness. It now accounts for the feature flags on each workflow test command, including multiline commands, checks every available named test exactly once, and requires complete coverage in the consensus-enabled build. Unknown explicit feature flags fail the guard. CI runs this guard with both default and all features, and pins the batch-read and readiness tests. The contributor guide records 138 named library guards. Runtime behavior and wire formats are unchanged.

The historical list of 17 failures is now empty after verifying both library configurations. README and contributor instructions reflect the clean baseline; the documentation guard permits an explicitly documented empty list. The suite gate runs serially with locked dependencies and cleans up its comparison files.

Both complete library configurations pass: default features 496 passed and 27 ignored; all features 533 passed and 28 ignored, with zero failures in either run. The all-feature/all-target check also passes. After the baseline update, all-feature documentation/workflow guards and the repository suite gate pass, the latter with zero current or recorded failures. Ignored tests, integration and multi-host scale coverage, and larger checkpoint support remain separate requirements; this does not establish full distributed production readiness.

@matrixarkai
matrixarkai merged commit 9e3a782 into main Oct 28, 2026
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants