dsmiley commented on PR #5281: URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/5281#issuecomment-6688609313
Here's [the first result from a PR](https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/5306#issuecomment-6684647224)! ---- <!-- llm-pr-triage --> **Automated PR triage** (LLM-generated; may be wrong). Checked once, when the PR was opened or marked ready; not updated on later pushes. **1 possible mismatch(es)** between what this change warrants and what the PR includes. | | Warranted? | In PR? | Confidence | Why | |---|---|---|---|---| | ✅ [Jira issue in title](https://github.com/apache/solr/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) | — | yes | — | Already present; not judged. | | ⚠️ [Changelog](https://github.com/apache/solr/blob/main/dev-docs/changelog.adoc#_changelog_types_reference) **— missing** | added | no entry | high | The PR introduces a new `secure` example for `bin/solr start -e`, which is a new opt-in feature for users to evaluate a secure Solr setup, warranting an 'added' changelog entry. | | ✅ [Reference Guide update](https://github.com/apache/solr/tree/main/solr/solr-ref-guide) | yes | yes | high | The PR adds a new example type `secure` to the CLI, which is documented in the Reference Guide's getting started section and CLI reference, and the description explicitly mentions adding a tutorial page. | | ✅ [Upgrade notes](https://github.com/apache/solr/tree/main/solr/solr-ref-guide/modules/upgrade-notes/pages) | no | no | high | The change is purely additive, introducing a new example option without modifying existing behavior, parameters, or defaults. | | ✅ Tests | no | no | high | The changes are primarily to the CLI example launcher (`RunExampleTool.java`) and shell scripts (`bin/solr`), which fall under developer tooling and build/CI infrastructure that does not require new unit tests, and the PR already includes comprehensive BATS integration tests. | _⚠️ mismatch, ❔ uncertain or unanswered, ✅ agrees. Matching changelog, docs and test files were hidden from the model; the PR description may still mention them. File presence does not establish adequacy._ Assessed commit `86818a97fdfd2b29d82cfcd50a7397769bdffafc`. ---- Overall I love seeing this in action and I think it's a great step forward 🎉 . It is kinda large & wordy. I think I'd prefer a series of bullets instead of a table. When there's full agreement -- no "Why" explanation needed. Maybe insert as a comment that can be viewed in the markdown view. Maybe confidence doesn't need to be shown when it's "high". WDYT @epugh ? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
