feat: import reviewed plugin bundles through publication gates - #3641
feat: import reviewed plugin bundles through publication gates#3641Patrick-Erichsen wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
|
🦞👀 Pull request received. I will update this pull request when review starts. ClawSweeper review completeClawSweeper finished reviewing this revision. The review result is being finalized. |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
Codex review: needs real behavior proof before merge. Reviewed September 9, 2026, 12:10 AM ET / 04:10 UTC (Revision 3). ClawSweeper reviewWhat this changesAdds an operator command that prepares reviewed plugin bundles, verifies their upload bytes, and publishes them through ClawHub’s existing security checks. Merge readiness⛔ Blocked before merge - 11 items remain Keep open: this remains distinct, useful work absent from current main, and the collaborator-authored PR is protected from automatic closure. All three prior findings remain supported; the newer recovery authorization checks do not cover ordinary imported releases. Priority: P2 Review scores
Verification
How this fits togetherClawHub’s importer converts curated upstream files into downloadable plugin packages. It submits them through the CLI and staged publication worker, which controls when releases enter the public catalog. flowchart TD
A[Curated sources] --> B[License and capability inventory]
B --> C[Prepared bundle and review digest]
C --> D[CLI upload verification]
D --> E[Private pending release]
E --> F[Security checks and authorization]
F --> G[Public catalog and downloads]
Before merge
Findings
Agent review detailsSecurityNeeds attention: The new staged user-import path can retain organization publishing authority after membership revocation. Review metrics
Merge-risk optionsMaintainer options:
Technical reviewBest possible solution: Keep the existing publication pipeline, enforce current organization authority at promotion, and produce reviewed artifacts whose metadata and detected format match the intended installation. Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue? Yes, the findings have concrete source-backed triggers: revoke membership during pending checks, import a bundle with its upstream package.json name, or prepare an Agent bundle. This read-only review did not execute those scenarios. Is this the best way to solve the issue? No, the patch is not yet complete: reusing the existing publisher is the right layer, but its final authorization boundary and the generated artifact identities must be corrected instead of bypassing validation or introducing another publisher. Full review comments:
Overall correctness: patch is incorrect AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant. Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning medium; reviewed against 39ff7db30c2e. LabelsLabel changes:
Label justifications:
EvidenceSecurity concerns:
What I checked:
Likely related people:
Rating scale
Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality. Workflow
HistoryReview history (2 earlier review cycles)
|
f969a2d to
af8f803
Compare
Imports a reviewed plugin batch through the ordinary ClawHub CLI and prepublication worker. The importer preserves licensed source bytes and attribution, normalizes the selected bundle format, omits unsupported capabilities, and binds approval to the exact upload inventory after filesystem handling and ignore rules.
First releases remain outside public catalog discovery until checks complete; publishers retain pending-review dashboard access. A request may require prepublication checks even when the deployment-wide staging rollout is disabled. This slice handles initial batch imports; immutable repeat synchronization is the next stack layer.
Validation passed:
ci:static,ci:unit(6,535 tests),ci:types-build,ci:packages,ci:e2e-http, focused regressions, and clean autoreview. The real local ClawHub acceptance run proves company/registry selection, duplicate/license/scan withholding, preserved downloaded files, and directopenclaw plugins install clawhub:<name>@<version>installs in a disposable OCM environment running OpenClaw 2026.9.3. Scanner verdicts are controlled fixtures through the real worker protocol; this is not a live ClawScan provider certification.