Skip to content

docs(roadmap): add #423 — diff json staged/unstaged are raw diff strings, not structured file-change objects#2969

Closed
code-yeongyu wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
docs/roadmap-423-diff-json-staged-unstaged-raw-string
Closed

docs(roadmap): add #423 — diff json staged/unstaged are raw diff strings, not structured file-change objects#2969
code-yeongyu wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
docs/roadmap-423-diff-json-staged-unstaged-raw-string

Conversation

@code-yeongyu
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Pinpoint #423

diff --output-format json returns staged and unstaged as raw git diff prose strings.

Live output (with unstaged changes):

{"kind":"diff","result":"changes","staged":"","unstaged":"diff --git a/ROADMAP.md b/ROADMAP.md\nindex ca63e33..2e4b74e 100644\n--- a/ROADMAP.md\n+++ b/ROADMAP.md\n@@ ..."}

No files:[] array, no per-file metadata, no total_additions/total_deletions. Automation must parse raw unified diff format to know which files changed.

Rebased on main after #2966 merge. Previously PR #2967 (closed due to dirty state).

ROADMAP-only PR. No source/test changes.

@Yeachan-Heo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Review verdict: REQUEST_CHANGES

Mechanically this PR is healthy:

Blocker: active duplicate roadmap PR exists.

#2969 adds ROADMAP #423 for diff --output-format json returning raw staged / unstaged unified diff strings instead of structured file-change objects. That is concrete and technically correct, but PR #2873 is still open and already adds substantially the same roadmap issue:

  • /diff --output-format json returns raw unified diff text in staged / unstaged
  • no files[]
  • no per-file path / change type / insertion/deletion counts
  • automation must parse unified diff text

Merging #2969 while #2873 remains open would create two roadmap entries for the same defect under different numbers.

Please either close/supersede #2873, or reconcile the content so only one roadmap item tracks this defect. After that, #2969 itself should be straightforward to approve/merge if the diff remains materially the same.


[repo owner's gaebal-gajae (clawdbot) 🦞]

@Yeachan-Heo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Review verdict: REQUEST_CHANGES

Inspected exact diff against current origin/main: docs-only ROADMAP.md change (+2/-0), no source/test/schema/runtime contract files touched. CI is green and merge state is CLEAN.

#2969 is materially equivalent to the previously reviewed #2967 replacement and improves the provenance date to 2026-04-30 KST (UTC+9). The #423 pinpoint itself is concrete/actionable: it names diff --output-format json, identifies staged/unstaged as raw unified diff strings, explains the automation impact, and asks for structured files[]/path/status/additions/deletions shape with regression coverage. #146 is related but broader/different (claw config/claw diff resume-wrapping/asymmetry), not the same schema defect.

Blocker: active duplicate PR #2873 is still open and appears to add substantially the same ROADMAP defect: /diff --output-format json raw staged/unstaged diff text with no files[] and no per-file path/change type/insertion/deletion counts.

Required before approval: close/supersede #2873, or reconcile the two PRs so only one ROADMAP item tracks this defect.

Merge risk: low mechanically, medium process/docs risk while the duplicate remains open.


[repo owner's gaebal-gajae (clawdbot) 🦞]

@code-yeongyu
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Closing — duplicate of PR #2873 / ROADMAP #366 which already covers diff --output-format json returning raw patch strings with no structured file-change objects. Thanks gaebal-gajae for catching the overlap.

@Yeachan-Heo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Small correction: #2873 was the dirty older PR, and this PR was the clean rebased replacement. I closed #2873 to avoid keeping the dirty duplicate as canonical.

Please reopen this PR if you still want to land the ROADMAP entry, or open a fresh clean rebased PR with the same single entry.


[repo owner's gaebal-gajae (clawdbot) 🦞]

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants