Codew Release QA Sweep

Codewhale Release QA Sweep

Run this before claiming any Codewhale release work is "done." A green automated gate sweep plus the three manual QA targets is the evidence bar. No sweep, no "done" — report exactly what was run and the result of each step.

When to use

• Before telling Hunter (or a PR thread) that release work is complete or merge-ready.
• After harvesting/landing PRs into the release branch, before the publish boundary.
• When verifying a release candidate on the real landing branch (e.g. <release-branch>), which is often local-only.

Automated gate sweep

Run from the repo root, in order. Stop on the first failure and report it.

# 0. Confirm you are on the real release head, not a main-based assumption.
git branch --show-current          # expect e.g. <release-branch>
git status --short                 # working tree should be clean

# 1. Formatting + stray whitespace/conflict markers
cargo fmt --all --check
git diff --check

# 2. Library/protocol/cli/flow/state tests, locked
cargo test -p codewhale-config -p codewhale-protocol -p codewhale-cli \
  -p codewhale-workflow -p codewhale-state --locked

# 3. TUI test binaries, locked
cargo test -p codewhale-tui --bins --locked

# 4. TUI debug build, locked
cargo build -p codewhale-tui --locked

# 5. Release build for the shipped binaries, locked
cargo build --release --locked -p codewhale-cli -p codewhale-tui

# 6. Version-drift gate (workspace ↔ npm ↔ Cargo.lock ↔ changelog ↔ README)
./scripts/release/check-versions.sh

# 7. Binary smoke
./target/release/codewhale --version

If you are validating a PR for landing, also test mergeability against the actual release head, never the main-based clean flag:

git merge-tree $(git merge-base <release-branch> <pr-head>) <release-branch> <pr-head>

A PR that is clean against main can still conflict with the release branch.

Manual QA targets

Unit/build gates do not cover the live TUI. Exercise all three and record what you saw:

Use the built binary with a sealed local home and loopback fixtures, then exercise the relevant scenarios below in an actual terminal. Record dimensions, inputs, visible state, and side effects. Do not substitute a full-screen assertion harness for looking at and using the product.

1. Six-worker fanout liveness (#3216/#2211). Spawn 6 sub-agents. Confirm typing, render, cancel, and the workbar stay live throughout, and that Esc cancels mid-fanout (prompt interrupt, not a wedged ~24s burst or freeze). For the Windows Terminal retest path from #3289, start in plan mode, add follow-up input to the plan, press Esc, switch to yolo/accept flow, trigger at least two auto/Fleet worker spawns, and keep typing/cancel/mode-switch checks live for several minutes. Attach logs if the freeze reproduces.
2. Multi-terminal route isolation (#3227). Open multiple terminals on distinct provider/model routes. Confirm zero cross-terminal contamination and no provider+model mismatch — each terminal honors its own route.
3. Running-turn input contract (#3203). During a busy turn, confirm Enter queues a typed follow-up, the preview advertises Enter send now, and an empty Enter promotes the oldest queued follow-up. Confirm Ctrl+Enter steers typed text directly, Shift+Enter inserts a newline, and Ctrl+G/Ctrl+S only stash drafts.

Reporting format

Report a checklist: each command, pass/fail, and the salient output line (test counts, the --version string, check-versions.sh verdict). For manual QA, state what you actually observed per target, citing the issue number. If a step was skipped or could not be run (e.g. no display for TUI QA), say so explicitly — do not imply coverage you do not have.

Red flags / don't

• Don't claim "done," "passing," or "merge-ready" without the evidence above. Assertions without command output are not acceptable.
• Don't trust the main-based mergeability flag for a release branch; use git merge-tree against the real head.
• Don't skip the manual TUI targets because the build is green — the freeze, route-mismatch, and steering regressions live in the runtime, not the gates.
• Don't tag, publish, create a GitHub Release, push artifacts, or merge/close any PR or issue without Hunter's explicit approval. A green sweep is readiness evidence, not permission.
• Never harvest/close from a PR title or label alone — review from code, tests, comments, and checks.
• When the sweep clears a harvested PR, preserve contributor credit: cherry-pick keeps the original author, otherwise add Co-authored-by: Name <email> and Harvested-from: PR #N by @handle so the auto-close-at-main workflow credits the contributor.
• Keep any contributor-facing comment positive and crediting; gates stay dry-run/advisory unless Hunter approves enforcement.