-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
feat: scheduled task integration tests and UI improvements #587
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.
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
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3fdf6d0
feat: add scheduled task integration tests and UI scaffolding
PureWeen 7d763c8
fix: address review feedback — bridge timeout observability and test …
PureWeen a29c3b6
fix: capture-restore test path and add GetTasksFilePathForTesting
PureWeen 87b57de
fix: address remaining review findings (z-index, CancellationToken, i…
PureWeen baa0652
feat: add /schedule delete <#> slash command for in-session task removal
PureWeen d5a8ffa
fix: address multi-model review findings
PureWeen fafdc31
fix: prevent duplicate prompt on cancel + echo ID in delete confirmation
PureWeen File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[🟡 MODERATE] Test Coverage — Structural test as sole scenario coverage
Flagged by: 3/3 reviewers (after adversarial consensus)
This test reads raw
.razormarkup from disk and asserts on string literals — a structural test pattern. Per PolyPilot conventions (copilot-instructions § "Behavioral Tests Over Structural"), structural tests should be supplementary guards, not primary coverage. Every other scenario cross-reference test in this file uses theAssert.True(true, "See ...")documentation pattern pointing to behavioral tests.The 4-level
../../../..path traversal fromAppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectoryis also fragile — it differs from the 3-levelScenariosDirpattern used elsewhere and may break in published/CI layouts with different output directory depths.Recommendation: Either (a) convert to the documentation pattern (
Assert.True(true, "See ...")) backed by a behavioral test, or (b) anchor the file path to the establishedScenariosDirbase and mark as supplementary coverage alongside a behavioral test.