Audit ledger: not applicable (non-release audit)
Context
A full post-merge audit of shakacode/react_on_rails covered the merge window:
The batch required a QA lane, but the audit could not find a durable QA Evidence marker for the range. That did not reveal a release-blocking code defect, but it left QA coverage as replay-hostile process evidence.
Motivating Miss
The audit searched PR bodies/comments and coordination state for durable QA evidence markers such as QA Evidence, Tested at, and the named QA lane. It found no reusable QA artifact for the full window.
Private coordination evidence was also not enough to reconstruct QA coverage cleanly: targeted lanes existed for the individual PRs, but their heartbeats were dead after merge and there was no matching durable QA evidence block to replay.
Process Gap Disposition
- Mechanism target:
schema
- Motivating miss: a required batch QA lane existed operationally, but there was no durable, parseable QA Evidence block tying coverage to the audited head/range.
- Replay evidence or park reason: replay the audit marker scans over the audited React on Rails PR window and confirm the result is
unknown until a valid QA Evidence block exists.
- Non-goal: replacing per-PR validation, or requiring heavyweight manual QA for every low-risk PR when the consumer repo policy says QA is not required.
Proposed Work
Define a portable QA Evidence schema and validation path for batch closeout:
- Fields: QA owner, lane id, branch/worktree, required/waived/not_applicable status, tested-at PR head SHA or audited range, changed surfaces covered, commands/manual checks run, findings, release-blocking status, and links to artifacts.
- Valid classifications:
satisfied, blocked, waived, in_progress, not_applicable, or unknown.
post-merge-audit should verify that the evidence applies to the audited head/range and that required QA findings are triaged.pr-batch closeout should require the marker when the batch plan says QA is required.- Consumer repos choose their QA policy in
AGENTS.md; shared workflows should provide the schema and replay check, not repo-specific QA names.
Acceptance Criteria
- Add documented schema text to the shared batch/audit workflow docs.
- Add a helper, parser, or checklist replay that can report missing/stale/current QA evidence for an audited PR range.
- A replay fixture based on the React on Rails full-window audit returns
unknown without the marker and satisfied when a valid sample marker covers the same range.
- Link related consumer-repo QA tracking rather than duplicating broad QA-process discussion.
Related
Audit ledger: not applicable (non-release audit)
Context
A full post-merge audit of
shakacode/react_on_railscovered the merge window:2026-07-01-independent-closeout-full575922ff3e2d50f8750877e8847fe7d2c79b995cedb02c7c6be18a2919e9398ee1275d114d21a2edThe batch required a QA lane, but the audit could not find a durable QA Evidence marker for the range. That did not reveal a release-blocking code defect, but it left QA coverage as replay-hostile process evidence.
Motivating Miss
The audit searched PR bodies/comments and coordination state for durable QA evidence markers such as
QA Evidence,Tested at, and the named QA lane. It found no reusable QA artifact for the full window.Private coordination evidence was also not enough to reconstruct QA coverage cleanly: targeted lanes existed for the individual PRs, but their heartbeats were dead after merge and there was no matching durable QA evidence block to replay.
Process Gap Disposition
schemaunknownuntil a valid QA Evidence block exists.Proposed Work
Define a portable QA Evidence schema and validation path for batch closeout:
satisfied,blocked,waived,in_progress,not_applicable, orunknown.post-merge-auditshould verify that the evidence applies to the audited head/range and that required QA findings are triaged.pr-batchcloseout should require the marker when the batch plan says QA is required.AGENTS.md; shared workflows should provide the schema and replay check, not repo-specific QA names.Acceptance Criteria
unknownwithout the marker andsatisfiedwhen a valid sample marker covers the same range.Related