Skip to content

ci: the ruby repo's CI tests itself (stale monorepo job removed) - #819

Merged
ronaldtse merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
fix/self-ci
Oct 21, 2026
Merged

ronaldtse merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
fix/self-ci

Conversation

@ronaldtse

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The restructure left the rspec job checking out the old interscript monorepo and running ITS corpus specs. After the Thai encodings merged into the maps repo, that job started failing on the monorepo runtime executing the new maps embedded tests (the phasathai failures) -- cross-repo coupling that the standalone ruby repo should not carry.

The rspec job now checks out THIS repo and runs its own suite (SKIP_JS/SKIP_PYTHON per the convention); the conformance-matrix job consolidates into the same workflow.

Stacks with #816 (equivalence + the C1-shakeout runtime fixes) and #817 (the A4 rulings).

…moved)

The restructure left the rspec job checking out the old monorepo and
running ITS corpus specs -- which now enumerate the maps repo and test
the new Thai encodings under the monorepo's older runtime (the
phasathai failures). A standalone repo tests itself: self-checkout,
full spec suite, SKIP_JS/SKIP_PYTHON per the convention. The
conformance-matrix job moves into this workflow (it ran on the same
triggers).
The byte-decode relabeled invalid sequences as UTF-8; the python
reference decodes with errors=replace (U+FFFD). Ruby String#scrub
matches byte-for-byte. Caught by the C1 conformance matrix: the
invalid bytes crashed first_alternates' split.
CONFORMANCE.md pins the decoder at a 512-step cap; the runtime
defaults had drifted (translator 100, byt5 256) truncating long
outputs (the fas docs-split rows). The C1 matrix caught it.
* origin/main:
  feat(WO59/A3): Interscript::Equivalence — system-equivalence checking (#816)
  test(WO80/A4): normative rulings for parallel composition (#818)
@ronaldtse
ronaldtse merged commit d59ee95 into main Oct 21, 2026
11 checks passed
@ronaldtse
ronaldtse deleted the fix/self-ci branch October 21, 2026 17:24
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.

1 participant