Adopt proof-pr v0.2.1

[saagpatel]

Summary

• updates the proof-pr reusable workflow pin to v0.2.1
• updates the installed proof_pr_ref to v0.2.1

Proof Bundle

Risk: T3
Receipt: proof-pr.v1 for 698b6fde9b8c1633ac303922ad3a008e7796abb3
Decision: ready_with_operator_awareness

Evidence:

• release-available: v0.2.1 release exists with validated receipt asset -> passed.
• workflow-update: reusable workflow and install ref both pin v0.2.1 -> passed.
• metadata-gate: not_applicable (legacy repo history is not noreply-clean yet; keep adoption advisory-only.)
• github-workflow-dispatch: passed (manual workflow passed on PR Adopt proof-pr v0.2.1 #96.)
• rollback: documented (revert this PR or pin back to v0.2.0.)

Known gaps:

• This is workflow-only and does not touch the active operator-trend PR work. The public metadata gate remains deferred until repo history/tag hygiene is handled separately.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bae39661af

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".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Fix metadata gate before enabling it

When this manual workflow is dispatched on this PR branch, the v0.2.1 reusable workflow defaults public_git_metadata_ref to github.sha and runs proof-pr check-public-git-metadata --ref "$PUBLIC_METADATA_REF"; the CLI only allows GitHub noreply emails. The reviewed commit itself is authored and committed as Codex <codex@openai.com>, so setting check_public_git_metadata: true makes the new proof workflow fail before it can validate or upload the receipt for this change. Rewrite the commit metadata to an allowed noreply identity or defer the gate until the checked ref is clean.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.