Skip to content

♻️ Move the CLI to the current review system - #349

Merged
Robdel12 merged 10 commits into
mainfrom
rd/remove-v1-review
Aug 31, 2026
Merged

♻️ Move the CLI to the current review system#349
Robdel12 merged 10 commits into
mainfrom
rd/remove-v1-review

Conversation

@Robdel12

@Robdel12 Robdel12 commented Aug 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why

The server is removing the original review system, so the CLI cannot keep calling its endpoints or translating its data. The old code mixed current review state with approval fields, response fallbacks, screenshot-level decisions, flaky markers, hot spots, dynamic regions, and local TDD caches. That made CLI output depend on behavior the product no longer supports.

Approach

Keep the review commands, but run them through the current review API. Approve and reject resolve the comparison's build and organization, then send a command ID, decision, and optional annotation. Comment continues to use the build comment API. Stable command IDs keep token-refresh retries safe without fetching or sending review counters.

Builds, comparisons, status, context, upload results, the local TDD dashboard, and visual context consume the current server responses directly. The old approval fields, adapters, hot-spot and dynamic-region calculations, metadata, caches, and overlays are deleted rather than translated.

The only removed command-line option is context screenshot --window-size, because it controlled the deleted hot-spot history window. Approve, reject, comment, status, context, run, upload, and TDD remain.

Evidence

Real CLI process coverage exercises approve, reject, annotations, token refresh, same-command retries, and another decision after review state changes. The review, context, status, API, TDD, and output suites pass against the current response contract.

Deployment note

This is the CLI half of vizzly-testing/vizzly#707. Deploy Vizzly first because this branch consumes the server's new review_locator response; deploy the CLI after the Vizzly server and workers are live.

Resolve review scope from the server, preserve annotations atomically, honor review versions and command idempotency, and retire raw API access to the old SDK mutations.
Delete hotspot and confirmed-region cache APIs, persistence, automatic pass logic, context projections, and reporter controls. Stale cache data can no longer affect comparison results or local review output.
Emit the canonical visual_review contract across commands, upload results, local context, types, tests, and JSON documentation. Remove status fallbacks that kept the retired review response shape alive.
Keep the local baseline reporter on its own review state vocabulary and delete obsolete tests that only described retired cache inputs. The retained context workflow still proves stale cache files cannot affect evidence.
Use direct names like review state, analysis details, and status response throughout the CLI. Remove inflated compatibility terminology from code, tests, and repo-owned docs.
Keep the current output contract tests focused on supported review data instead of preserving retired field names as negative fixtures.
Require the current status and context response shapes, remove flat and cached v1 adapters, and use plain local formatting names.
Run the real CLI process against a stateful HTTP boundary to prove decisions, annotations, stale-version errors, auth refresh, and idempotent retries.
Keep the shipped Vizzly skill aligned with the current review and diff behavior after removing hotspot and confirmed-region support.
Submit comparison decisions directly after resolving their build and organization. Keep command IDs for safe auth retries without fetching or sending a review counter.
@Robdel12 Robdel12 changed the title 🔥 Remove v1 review support from the CLI ♻️ Move the CLI to the current review system Aug 30, 2026
@Robdel12
Robdel12 merged commit 7ade3ef into main Aug 31, 2026
28 of 30 checks passed
@Robdel12
Robdel12 deleted the rd/remove-v1-review branch August 31, 2026 04:30
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant