Skip to content

[WRONG BRANCH] fix(catalog): hide retired DeepSeek Pro aliases - #517

Draft
luvs01 wants to merge 27 commits into
devfrom
codex/propose-fix-for-deepseek-v4-pro-issue
Draft

luvs01 wants to merge 27 commits into
devfrom
codex/propose-fix-for-deepseek-v4-pro-issue

Conversation

@luvs01

@luvs01 luvs01 commented Sep 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Motivation

  • Augmentation from the generated Jawcode metadata reintroduced retired deepseek-v4-pro rows for deepseek and opencode-go, exposing stale aliases in the routed catalog.
  • The registry removal alone left those aliases selectable because augmentRoutedModelsWithMetadata adds metadata rows before the compatibility filter.
  • Preventing presentation and selection of retired aliases is required so request shaping and capability controls are not silently lost.

Description

  • Add "deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro" and "opencode-go/deepseek-v4-pro" to ROUTED_MODEL_COMPATIBILITY_EXCLUSIONS in src/codex/catalog/parsing.ts so metadata-augmented rows are dropped by shouldExposeRoutedModel.
  • Add regression assertions to tests/codex-integration/codex-catalog.test.ts that verify shouldExposeRoutedModel returns false for both deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro and opencode-go/deepseek-v4-pro while keeping positive controls for live models.
  • Clarify the catalog contract in structure/catalog.md to note that generated historical metadata may retain retired aliases and that compatibility exclusions are applied after live discovery and augmentation.

Testing

  • Ran the focused catalog test with npx --yes bun@1.4.2 test tests/codex-integration/codex-catalog.test.ts --test-name-pattern 'still filters compatibility-excluded slugs' --dots, and the focused test passed.
  • Ran npx --yes bun@1.4.2 run structure:check, npx --yes bun@1.4.2 run typecheck, and npx --yes bun@1.4.2 run privacy:scan, all of which succeeded.
  • Ran the repository-wide npx --yes bun@1.4.2 run test; the focused change is covered, but the full suite failed in this environment due to unrelated, container-sensitive timeouts and process-group test expectations, and not because of this change.

Codex Task

lidge-jun and others added 27 commits September 6, 2026 01:08
…43-01a07240

[WRONG BRANCH] chore(release): promote verified candidate to 2.43.0
…in-07c0

chore(release): promote validated 2.44.0 to main
Promote frozen dev source cf9f662; no new runtime changes. Candidate CI34061274315 and service34061276621 are the validation references. Publication waits for successful validation and the final main push CI at the exact release SHA.
Promote frozen dev source cf9f662 as 2.45.0.

The repository owner explicitly authorized this main/preview release promotion and admin PR-only merge. This is a release-specific owner decision, not an independent approval or the dev-only maintainer exception.

Frozen candidate full CI34061274315 passed all25jobs after one unchanged-source rerun of Windows5; the initial holder busy assertion remains recorded without a root-cause resolution claim. Service lifecycle34061276621 passed Linux/macOS/Windows. Dev version pre-move3812 is merged. Publication still requires this actual main merge SHA's own successful push CI and Service lifecycle. No local suites were run.
[WRONG BRANCH] chore(release): promote verified 2.46.0 to main
[WRONG BRANCH] release: promote 2.47.0 to main
[WRONG BRANCH] release: apply final roster correction to main
[WRONG BRANCH] release: promote 2.48.0 to main
…in-01a08498

release: promote verified 2.49.0 product tree to main
Promotes the audited freeze SHA 12c248f unchanged. The resulting tree is byte-identical to that commit's tree, d8f5a71, so what ships is exactly what the six-lane regression audit read.
…in-01a08a81

[WRONG BRANCH] release: promote verified 2.50.0 product tree to main
[WRONG BRANCH] release: promote verified 2.51.0 product tree to main
Product tree is dev at 7bfb2ad. Only package.json differs, carrying the
stable channel version 2.52.0.

This promotion follows a CI repair and a regression sweep: dev had drifted 79
commits past its last finished run and the one run allowed to complete had
failed. lidge-jun#4390 fixed an integration test that never denied anything and had been
red on dev since lidge-jun#4342; lidge-jun#4396/lidge-jun#4397/lidge-jun#4398 closed four gaps in the quota
avoidance contract lidge-jun#4368 introduced; lidge-jun#4403 made a port fixture deterministic.
release: promote verified 2.52.0 product tree to main
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Sep 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Important

  • 🔍 Trigger review

This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: bdc7537b-f120-434d-a3c9-8b9049f5d1a5


Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review Completed 2026-09-14T00:27:34.736125Z 6282090 PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@luvs01
luvs01 changed the base branch from main to Dev September 14, 2026 00:27

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 628209080a

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +195 to +196
"deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro",
"opencode-go/deepseek-v4-pro",

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Synchronize every structure doc owning src/codex

This changes the src/codex/ catalog contract but updates only structure/catalog.md; the ownership table also lists runtime.md, config.md, codex-home.md, subagents.md, providers/openai-tiers.md, gui-and-management-api.md, and ops/docs-and-release.md. Review and update each listed document in this change so their descriptions remain synchronized with the new compatibility exclusions.

AGENTS.md reference: src/AGENTS.md:L11-L11

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 14, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deterministic PR hygiene checks passed.

@github-actions github-actions Bot changed the title fix(catalog): hide retired DeepSeek Pro aliases [WRONG BRANCH] fix(catalog): hide retired DeepSeek Pro aliases Sep 14, 2026
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

⏳ DRAFT

  • wrong target branch (Dev); retarget to dev. UI screenshot required.

What to do

  • Retarget this PR to dev — all contributions go to dev.
  • Add a screenshot of the UI change to the PR description.

Its title has been prefixed with [WRONG BRANCH].
This pull request was already a draft. Its draft status will be preserved after every issue above is resolved.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

aardvark bug Something isn't working codex

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants