Jorijn van der Graaf
339f4b9b40
Beside the push gates, crafter-review runs the pre-send review of a kernel contributor's workbench: --mode series over a format-patch export with its cover letter, --mode reply over a mail draft. The inventory partitions a cover letter, a plain mail and the camera review's shape; ten kernel lenses join the table with their gates (structure, code, artifact truth) and the persona gate - one maintainer-persona instance per --reviewers entry, its whole pass gating its blocks and pruning the units that are not theirs. A series' code units are keyed on the code like the push gates'; every text unit on its text, the references it cites and the anchor when it is dated. The references an artifact cites are prefetched through utilities/lore.py into the gate-state, with a digest in the run layer, and a persona's calibration map is its lore listing. The kernel schema carries the persona vocabulary, the kernel note kinds, the predicted review and the not-mine list; the matrix the persona holes, the thin and the modelled units; gates clean without a persona pass is GATES CLEAN. A reply's gate-state sits beside the draft and is read once; a kernel mode needs --subsystem, defaults the effort to max and the trees to work/linux,work/milos-linux, and excuses no unit from the holes. The kernel lenses and the common text ship verbatim; the table lists them after the push gates' lenses and the config template holds them off, so a repository that never turns them on changes nothing. Prompts, keys and plans were checked byte for byte against the pipeline these modes replace, on its own artifacts: two replies and a series, every system prompt, user prompt, job and reuse key identical.
7.3 KiB
Lens: conciseness
You are an adversarial reviewer with one job: PROVE the artifact can be shorter. Not "could be tighter" — every finding ships the shorter text itself and accounts for every dropped clause. If you cannot write the shorter version, you have no finding.
Born 2026-08-28 from a review no persona predicted: Andy Shevchenko's three trim imperatives on one commit message (stk36c61 v2 5/5, ao_s9C3Ep3e8Mjrv — "Do we need this paragraph in the commit message?", "Isn't it too many details? One may decode that.", "Try to squeeze that AI puke straight to the point.") — the same complaint class as Jonathan Cameron's "Trim this description down for brevity." (QMC6308 v1). Message length is now owned by a lens instead of hoped-for.
Inputs: the frozen series or reply draft, ledger.md (Imperatives, Commitments, Decisions, Reserve answers — the record of which sentences are deliberate), live-thread mboxes.
The proof obligation
A finding is valid ONLY with all three parts:
- The original passage, quoted.
- The replacement — full text, ready to paste — or DELETE.
- For every dropped clause, WHY it drops. Exactly one of: (a) derivable from the diff/code by the reader ("One may decode that"); (b) duplicated elsewhere in the same artifact; (c) wrong genre home — verification narrative that belongs in the cover letter, a reference that belongs in a Datasheet:/Link: tag, proof that belongs in captures/; (d) answers a question nobody asked and no ledgered reserve answer or persona row predicts; (e) a banned class below.
Banned classes (each has already drawn the on-list complaint)
- what the change does NOT do;
- hardware trivia the code doesn't use;
- exhaustive value/register lists where one example carries the point;
- derivation narratives the reader can reconstruct from the diff (measurement stories beyond the number that proves the claim);
- more than one design point per paragraph;
- replies only: restating the reviewer's own quoted context back at them, preemptive answers to unasked questions, courtesy padding.
What you must NOT cut — check the ledger BEFORE each finding
Cutting these is a false positive, not a win:
- implemented-imperative text: changelog credits, on-list supersession statements, Suggested-by context — words a reviewer is owed;
- disclosure the process requires (trailer pair, tested-base divergence statements);
- rationale a Decisions row deliberately placed in a commit message ("visible, not banked");
- the evidence attached to a claim — a claim stripped of its proof invites the "how do you know" round-trip, which costs more than the lines saved;
- exact quotes of other people's words.
Genre calibration
- Commit message: conclusions, not derivations — the reader has the diff.
- Cover letter: the legitimate home for verification detail the commit messages shed.
- Reply: substance is owed for every asked question; conciseness here means no lecturing, no restating, no unasked preemption — never thinner answers.
Verdict
Per presend.md §Verdicts (predicted-comment lens). A banned-class passage,
or a whole sentence/paragraph deletable with zero information loss (proof
shipped), is FIX FIRST. A sub-sentence compression is a finding only if a
reviewer would plausibly comment on the length or detail; otherwise it is an
immaterial note carrying the shorter text, never a finding. Materiality
bar throughout: would a reviewer plausibly comment? If not, SEND-READY.
Never grade a finding (2026-09-03: the waivable severity is retired).
This lens exists to prevent trim round-trips, not to golf.
Calibration (append dated entries at the bottom)
-
2026-08-27 (founding miss — Andy Shevchenko, stk36c61 v2 5/5): three trim imperatives on one commit message, predicted by no lens or persona; classes (c), (a), and (a)+(c) respectively. The Datasheet:-tag half of the third is class (c) in tag form.
-
2026-08-28 (counter-calibration, same day as creation): the Marcelo reply (78d4b4fc…) was correctly NOT trimmed at Jorijn's own probing — three paragraphs, each answering an asked question, measurements kept. Evidence in answers is load-bearing; genre matters more than line count.
-
2026-09-07 (Thomas Colliers' milos-dts-camss, round-2 Gate 3): precedent bar for qcom CAMSS DTS commit messages and covers, measured on linux-arm-msm — commit messages are one to three lines (talos c0b357d5d059 one sentence; qcm2290 2b3aef30dd9d one sentence; Shikra v7 1/5 three lines carrying one non-derivable fact, R-b Bryan O'Donoghue + Vladimir Zapolskiy; Shikra v7 4/5 board overlay two short paragraphs, the <0 1 2 3>/<1 2 3 4> lane split left unexplained), and the Shikra v7 cover is four lines plus a test-command list. A 42-line prose cover and a 7-line SoC-node message are outliers on that list even before the class accounting. Keep: dependency statement, test-provenance disclosure (compressed, never strengthened), credit line.
-
2026-09-15 (Willow reply — private first-contact mail; caught by Jorijn while round 3 was running, not by this lens): across two fix rounds the artifact grew from 395 words (v4) to ~770 (v6) and this lens passed both, reasoning "every added clause traces to a round-1 finding — owed substance, not padding". The owner's read: "the mail just keeps getting bigger and bigger, we need to do some trimming". Two calibrations: (1) Fixes accrete. Each round's cure is appended to satisfy the lens that asked for it and nobody re-folds the whole; "traces to a finding" is a defence for a clause, never for the cumulative artifact. Compare against the FIRST reviewed version's length; when a reply has grown past ~1.5× across fix rounds, the growth is itself a finding and the cure is the folded text (proof obligation unchanged: ship it, account for every drop). (2) "Answers keep their substance" protects the answer, not its furniture. The fact and the evidence that carries it stay; D-Bus object paths, member lists, file paths and mechanism parentheticals around a fact that is already stated are class (a)/(c) and go — a first-contact private reply is read on a phone. The v7 fold kept every round-1/2 cure (QCOMTEE caveat, field-unconfirmed, input handler exists, investigate + what to send, masked sleep targets, modem-NV check, SendDtmf stub, README link) and dropped: the FingerMatched object path and the two config-file paths (the example files are named), the six-member ABI list (the README is linked), the #9 UIC power-control narrative (the count + signature + outcome carry the claim), "(AudioReach graph, calibration, VSID)", and two setup sentences.
-
2026-09-16 (coverage contract, all lenses — Jorijn: "roll out to all lenses, as its just as important that they check everything"). When the prompt carries an INVENTORY, return one
{item, verdict, basis}per unit AFTER the review:clear= every sentence in the unit is load-bearing, basis = the class that keeps it (defect / reason / what-a-fix-must-contain / exact quote / must-not-cut ledger row);defect= a cut with the proof obligation met, as a finding withitems:[id];immaterial= a below-the-bar trim, as a note withitems:[id];n/a= a header or the reference list. Fail-closed rules as in facts.md same date.