On 9/21/26 00:52, Alexander Berg wrote:
Two corrections to my own review of TrustSight, since both went to the
list.
First, the neovim-git instability is real but I described it wrongly. For
commit 99d9d479, inspect scores 0/100 with no findings when the local
dependency corpus is unseeded
What on earth is a dependency corpus? And what does it mean for a
dependency corpus to be seeded or not?
because the D-series is deliberately silent on
an empty table, and 25/100 with D001, "Novel Dependency Added: optdepends
'tree-sitter-cli' has never been seen in the AUR", when the corpus is
populated but lacks that name.
D-series? What? What empty table?
The run folds the names it just saw into its
own corpus, so an immediate rerun of the identical command falls back to
0/100.
We have another corpus now? And names can be folded into it?
So the same command has three possible answers, but the sequence is
0 and 25, not the 0/15/0 I wrote. "Maintainer first seen for this
package" is
not a rule: it is a tier-C novelty score component, and it never
appears in
--last output at all, because the second RPC lookup gets a trimmed
record back
with no maintainer field.
Interesting. I didn't know we have tiers of novelty scores we can assign
to components. And something is looking up RPCs? Cool.
Second, on qt5-styleplugins f15a54a1: it adds one new patch file and
renames
the existing one; git reports the rename as R100 with byte-identical
content.
What on earth is git reporting something as R100?
The new entry is the third element of source and sha512sums, not the
second.
With rename detection off git shows two additions and one deletion,
which is
where my "two patch files" came from. The finding itself stands: that
commit
still comes back as "No findings", 0/100.
I have sent Emiliano the full reproduction material with commands and
verbatim
output for all three cases.
Alexander Berg
If this is an AI review of some project, could you please post it on the
project issue tracker instead of the mailing list?
Perhaps some of what your AI wrote makes sense to the maintainer, but to
me it's all gibberish. I don't think it's suitable for the mailinglist.
I apologize if I'm being grumpy, but I get a lot of AI nonsense to
filter through at work. I hope we can keep it out of the mailinlists.
Kind regards,
Maarten
