[kyle-sexton]

No related issue: finishes the ci-workflows v0.39.3 repin wave, whose earlier PR in this repository missed these lines.

Summary

Repins the remaining ci-workflows v0.38.2 (cf316d12) composite-action pins in pr-require-checks.yml to v0.39.3 (ab83b01).

Fix

The wave PR moved the v0.39.0 pin but left these v0.38.2 lines. They are composite actions, so no runner-policy contract is involved. With these merged, no repository pins v0.38.2, and its contracts can be retired in standards.

Verification

• Each action path exists at ab83b01 (gh api repos/melodic-software/ci-workflows/contents/.github/actions/<path>/action.yml?ref=ab83b01).
• actionlint on the workflow: no new findings; the only report is a pre-existing SC2016 note on an unchanged step.
• The diff changes only uses: pin lines.

Related

• ci-workflows v0.39.3 repin wave; contracts in feat(runner-policy): add ci-workflows v0.39.3 contracts standards#742.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7GukBojtE99rLCPY7Cw3R

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

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

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-09T04:06:55.057223Z	e5df5c1	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.

[claude]

Claude finished @kyle-sexton's task in 1m 18s —— View job

---

Claude Code Review — PR #83

• Gather context (PR diff, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md)
• Understand request (invoke /review:code-review for this PR)
• Review changed file(s) against criteria
• Post findings / summary

Skip gate: trivial/automated change, no meaningful review surface. This PR only repins two uses: SHA references (and their trailing version comments) in .github/workflows/pr-require-checks.yml from cf316d12… (v0.38.2) to ab83b012… (v0.39.3) — no logic, inputs, or control flow changed.

What I checked:

• git diff origin/main...HEAD confirms the diff touches only the two uses: lines (+2/-2), matching the PR's stated scope.
• grep across the repo for v0.38.2 / the old SHA (cf316d12b4a14fbdb96a339b7ad00ce935a8cad4) returns nothing — this does finish the repin wave as claimed.
• The replacement SHA ab83b01273026ab5c23c6f3b40e946d97a863fa2 already appears, pinned to the same v0.39.3 comment, in .github/workflows/pr-check-managed-files-hosted.yml:106, so it's internally consistent with the rest of the repo rather than a one-off typo.
• The PR body's claims that each action path resolves at ab83b01 on ci-workflows and that actionlint reports no new findings are author-claimed; I don't have network/gh api access to the ci-workflows repo or an actionlint binary in this sandbox to independently re-verify those two points, but the in-repo consistency above is corroborating evidence.

No findings to report — nothing here would get a block or a comment from a careful reviewer.

[claude]

Claude finished @kyle-sexton's task in 42s —— View job

---

Security Review — no issues found

• Gather context (PR diff, changed files)
• Understand the request (invoke /review:security-review per custom instructions)
• Run /review:security-review against this PR
• Post findings / summary

Scope reviewed: .github/workflows/pr-require-checks.yml (the only changed file) — commit blob.

Change: two uses: pins for composite actions (check-contract, aggregate-results) move from cf316d12… (v0.38.2) to ab83b012… (v0.39.3). Both before and after are full 40-character commit SHAs with a trailing version comment — no pin is loosened, floating, or unpinned.

Result: No security issues. This diff has no logic, authorization, injection, or trust-boundary surface — it is a pure commit-pin bump on already-pinned composite actions. Per this skill's scope, supply-chain pin changes (tightened, loosened, or moved) are zizmor's advisory lane, not this lane's; nothing here needed the logic/architecture/data-flow reasoning this lane adds. The skip gate applies.

No instruction files (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, rules/skill/agent bodies) are touched, so the instruction-surface-deletion check is not applicable.

[github-actions]

claude-security-review has reviewed this pull request through e5df5c1; a later push is reviewed from there.

[github-actions]

claude-review has reviewed this pull request through e5df5c1; a later push is reviewed from there.