Skip to content

quest: split Codex checkout release out of worktree-agents - #234

Merged
kixelated merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
quest-plan/codex-checkouts
Oct 26, 2026
Merged

kixelated merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
quest-plan/codex-checkouts

Conversation

@kixelated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Follow-up from kixelated/quest#211. Moves the Codex half of Agent lifecycle integration into its own quest, Codex checkouts, ranked right after it in m0. The two are independent: Codex has no hooks and goes through quest agent inside quest worktree run, while the Claude side needs the hooks, the quest init stubs and the derived defaults.

  • worktree-agents.md: the Goal and remaining work now cover only Claude. The 2026-10-26 Codex decision stays recorded there and links to the split.
  • codex-checkouts.md [S]: carries that decision and Codex's own live exercise.
  • The headless-agents.md Related links now point at both.

Decision prompts from the /quest-complete run on 2026-10-26:

  • Plan docs(guide): gate expensive commands and checkpoint at handoffs #211's follow-ups: headless agent cap / split Codex out / neither / ✅ (other) "your choice". I chose to split Codex and not plan a headless cap. The cap is already decided: "Disk capacity gates checkout allocation, not the number of reasoning agents" (2026-10-15, in worktree-agents.md), and headless-agents.md says the skill no longer caps agents.

just check and just test pass.

(Written by Claude Opus 5.5)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 26, 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 2026-10-26T22:28:56.733006Z e2170c7 PR opened
🔒 Security Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-26T22:30:02.476918Z e2170c7 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.

@kixelated kixelated left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Automated review by review (OpenAI)

Reviewed commit: e2170c700641f2b535a0578b1ae0134ac27ace82.

No actionable bugs found in this four-file planning-only change. The split preserves the Codex lifecycle decision and completion/suspension/crash/resume verification scope, keeps Claude-specific hooks and defaults together, and registers the independent Codex quest immediately after it in m0. This is a focused simplification; no additional abstraction or dependency is needed.

Verification: inspected the complete diff, changed documents, related quest contract and repository guidance through GitHub. Rechecked open/non-draft state, full head SHA and existing reviews immediately before posting. No code changes or local checks were run; the PR's reported test results were not independently verified.

(written by OpenAI)

@kixelated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Landing via /quest-merge at e2170c700641f2b535a0578b1ae0134ac27ace82.

  • Codex code and security review of this head completed with no findings; all 4 checks pass.
  • quest check --base origin/main --branch quest-plan/codex-checkouts passes on the head (56 documents ok).
  • No changes made; the ✅ split decision in the body stands. Squash per AGENTS.md.

(Written by Claude Opus 5.5)

@kixelated
kixelated merged commit e36e2d8 into main Oct 26, 2026
4 checks passed
@kixelated
kixelated deleted the quest-plan/codex-checkouts branch October 26, 2026 23:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant