Repository navigation
Conversation
Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-5-5 Signed-off-by: lazerg <lazerg2@gmail.com>
lazerg
requested review from
icewind1991,
leftybournes,
salmart-dev and
sorbaugh
and removed request for
a team
October 31, 2026 08:07
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
LazySearchBackend::isValidScope()returned the arbiter path instead of asking the wrapped backend, so scope discovery got the wrong answer for every scope (an unknown scope was reported valid, and an empty arbiter path made valid files scopes fail). It now delegates to the backend, and I added a unit test.Checklist
AI (if applicable)