Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: e9961c942a
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".
| if semantic_category and actual_category != semantic_category: | ||
| row.is_deleted = True | ||
| row.bstatus = "retired" | ||
| retired += 1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't retire material templates after seeding
When bloom db build --overwrite reaches this cleanup, it now retires any row whose physical category differs from its semantic_category. The current template pack intentionally uses that split for active templates, e.g. config/tapdb_templates/bloom/templates.json:5911-5943 has category: "material" with semantic_category: "content"; this branch marks the just-seeded active row deleted, and the later expected-category check also deletes the old content-category variant. After an overwrite seed, lab/specimen flows that create material/... content templates will have no active template to resolve.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Summary
Validation