Conversation
Wave 1 Review Resultsarchitecture: PASS — lint-only change; no runtime coupling. Wave 1 PASSED. Good to proceed to Wave 2 / merge. |
|
(Minor fix) The cop name referenced above is: . |
|
(Minor fix) The cop name referenced above is: |
kitcommerce
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wave2 review (PR #1106)
{"reviewer":"test-quality","verdict":"PASS","severity":null,"summary":"Lint-only change; no test coverage concerns.","findings":[]}{"reviewer":"architecture","verdict":"PASS","severity":null,"summary":"Static analysis configuration only; no architecture impact.","findings":[]}{"reviewer":"database","verdict":"PASS","severity":null,"summary":"No database impact.","findings":[]}{"reviewer":"security","verdict":"PASS","severity":null,"summary":"No security impact.","findings":[]}{"reviewer":"rails-security","verdict":"PASS","severity":null,"summary":"No Rails security impact.","findings":[]}{"reviewer":"simplicity","verdict":"PASS","severity":null,"summary":"Small, focused RuboCop config addition.","findings":[]}{"reviewer":"rails-conventions","verdict":"PASS_WITH_NOTES","severity":"LOW","summary":"Looks fine; just ensure our RuboCop version supports the cop in all supported branches.","findings":[{"severity":"LOW","file":".rubocop.yml","line":1,"issue":"Enabling a new cop can break CI if a downstream environment pins an older RuboCop without Lint/BigDecimalNew.","suggestion":"If any supported branches pin older RuboCop, consider gating via TargetRubyVersion/RuboCop upgrade, or document minimum RuboCop version."}]}|
|
|
|
|
Fixes #1105
Summary
BigDecimal.newusage (no call sites found).Lint/BigDecimalNewcop to prevent future reintroduction.Testing
Client impact
None expected.