Repository navigation
Change impact × policy: follow-ups from #389's post-merge review #402
Description
Follow-ups from the post-merge review of #389. Repro inputs for each are in that review comment.
- Filter rules by device presence in both snapshots; report absent ones once (fixes the stranger-network
verified=False). Owner: Shubham. - Pass the staged policy through
propose_change(policy=)and/api/propose; keywarningon direction, not severity. Owners: Ankeet + Samika. - State the policy coverage: how many rules were compared and which sections were not; make an empty
policy_compliancesection loud; decide whetheraccess_control/routingjoin. - Differential
searchFiltersfor rules breached on both sides; take "still breached" out of thenonecard; scope the "neither causes nor fixes" wording to the filter. - Tests: fake-session
_rule_breached(snapshot switch, action, every arm);policy=Pis what gets evaluated; the number guard. - Run the policy stage even when reachability fails, or say it did not run; give CH-051 a collision-proof id.
- Docs: change_impact docstring, CLAUDE.md:716, shapes doc open question 2, placement of the policy-rules.md section, CLI notes.
Activity
patelankeet2 commentedon Oct 18, 2026
Picked up item 2 (the propose-a-change policy wiring, assigned to me and Samika): PR #405.
Live-reproduced both halves before fixing -- propose always used the built-in policy regardless of what was staged, and separately, a high-severity policy requirement breach would have made the warning banner claim "opens access" on a change that actually closes required access. Both fixed, both re-verified end to end through the real running server.
The other items on this checklist (device-presence filtering, coverage wording, differential searchFilters, tests, docs) are yours or joint follow-ups and are untouched by #405.
shubhamkataria2005 commentedon Oct 20, 2026
Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are in #406, along with #403. Item 2 is #405. The checklist above can be ticked as each PR merges.