Repository navigation
RC-442 Move vibebot to ruling_java and align ruling project keys - #6297
romainbrenguier wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
da4d37d to
55de8b6
Compare
Ruling Diff SummaryDetected changes in 1378 rule files: 160962 issues removed, 160962 issues added. S103 (
|
rombirli
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM,
as i'm not familiar with vibebot, a second review from a vibebot user who has more context would be welcome!
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Code Review ✅ Approved 1 closed / 1 findings🟡 Medium risk · Rekeying ruling projects and changing the shared test helper could misassociate sources with baselines, masking regressions in ruling analyses. Migrates vibebot project to ✅ 1 closed✅ Quality: AGENTS.md ruling docs still describe old project name and key format
Review coverage🧪 Functional validation No results 📋 Rules No rules evaluated 🤖 Auto-approval Not enabled · Set up OptionsAuto-apply is off → Gitar will not commit updates to this branch. Comment with these commands to change the behavior for this request:
Was this helpful? React with 👍 / 👎 | Gitar |
|
I added @asya-vorobeva to review the vibebot part |





Summary
its/vibebotintoruling_java/vibebot, update theits/sourcessubmodule, and use the common ruling helper for its analysis. Companion PR: RC-442 Move vibebot ruling project from sonar-java ruling_java#16.mall,guava,commons-beanutils,regex-examples,vibebot, andsonarqube-6.5;jboss-ejb3-tutorialalready matches.test_projecthelper so the source folder name is also the project key. Keep the nested SonarQube POM location unchanged.eclipse-jettyandjava-time-exampleas the shared keys for their respective main and incremental PR analyses, while preserving separate expected folders for the incremental variants.sonar-serverexpected folder tosonarqube-6.5and update baseline component keys without changing expected issue locations. Keep vibebot excluded from the normal ruling workflow.Merge order
Merge ruling_java PR #16 first. If squash-merging changes its commit SHA, update the submodule pointer here to the merged commit before merging this draft.
Validation
git diff --checkpasses; both working trees are clean after committing and pushing.GeneratedCheckListis missing.Deep analysis
Analyzed all 1,199 final modified files in one DEEP invocation; the service automatically split the large request into batches, which may reduce cross-file context. No issues were reported on changed lines. Only these existing findings remain on untouched
JavaRulingTest.javalines:Agent workflow
Tool link: https://github.com/SonarSource/languages-experimental-tooling/tree/romain/my-tickets/personal/romain-brenguier
PR created using
uv run create_with_claude.py /tmp/action_plan_romain/rc-442.txtIterated on the PR with
uv run ci_loop.pyfor 1 iterations.✔️ The PR is now ready for review.
PR updated using
uv run update_with_claude.py --prompt "Implement the action plan described in the document theits/sourcessubmodule points at70abc1b. That's the head of ruling_java#16, which was squash-merged, so the commit isn't onruling_javamaster. Move it to the merge commitec036cefirst.." -a "theits/sourcessubmodule points at70abc1b. That's the head of ruling_java#16, which was squash-merged, so the commit isn't onruling_javamaster. Move it to the merge commitec036cefirst." -g "claude"