fix(signals): preserve repo casing for open PR lookups

[JSONbored]

Motivation

• A recent change grouped open PRs case-insensitively but then reused a single PR's repoFullName casing for all downstream exact-case DB lookups, which caused mixed-case rows to be skipped for reviews/checks/files and under-counted pending scenarios.
• The goal is to ensure case-insensitive grouping remains while preserving each PR's stored casing when performing exact-case lookups so signal loading and pending-pr detection remain correct.

Description

• Use case-insensitive matching helpers and sameRepoFullName to select PR rows for signal loading and scenario detection instead of exact === equality in src/scoring/pending-pr-scenarios.ts.
• Load reviews/checks and files using each PR's stored repoFullName (e.g. pr.repoFullName) so exact-case DB accessors resolve the correct rows, and compute per-repo PR lists by filtering the original pullRequests set case-insensitively in src/signals/contributor-open-pr-monitor.ts.
• Add sameRepoFullName helper and update detectPendingPrScenario/loadContributorRepoOpenPrSignals to use it, and adjust buildContributorOpenPrMonitor to call listPullRequestFiles with each PR's stored casing.
• Add/update a unit test in test/unit/contributor-open-pr-monitor.test.ts that simulates mixed-case PR rows and asserts both PRs retain reviews/files and are included in pending scenario counts.

Testing

• Ran the focused unit suite with npx vitest run test/unit/contributor-open-pr-monitor.test.ts test/unit/pending-pr-scenarios.test.ts and all tests passed (29 tests across 2 files).
• Ran TypeScript typecheck with npm run typecheck and it succeeded.
• npm run test:coverage failed due to the coverage provider error TypeError: jsTokens is not a function, so full coverage collection could not complete locally.
• npm run test:ci and npm audit --audit-level=moderate were blocked by external/tooling issues (actionlint setup fallback complaining about a custom runner label and the npm audit endpoint returning 403), so the complete gated CI could not be run in this environment.

---

Codex Task

[gittensory-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-06-29 18:33:11 UTC}

3 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 68/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review

Review summary
The change correctly preserves each cached PR row's repository casing for exact DB lookups while still grouping and scenario detection case-insensitively. The monitor now derives the repo-scoped PR list from the already-loaded contributor PRs, which matches the downstream contributor-only filter and avoids reintroducing a case-sensitive repository query. The focused regression test exercises both review and file lookup casing for the mixed-case group.

Nits — 6 non-blocking

• nit: test/unit/contributor-open-pr-monitor.test.ts still mocks repositories.listPullRequests in several monitor tests even though src/signals/contributor-open-pr-monitor.ts no longer calls it, which makes those tests imply coverage for a removed path.
• nit: src/scoring/pending-pr-scenarios.ts:232 and src/signals/contributor-open-pr-monitor.ts:214 now carry separate case-insensitive comparison logic; extracting a shared repo-name matcher would reduce drift if normalization rules change.
• test/unit/contributor-open-pr-monitor.test.ts: remove the now-dead listPullRequests spies from monitor tests, or add an assertion that it is not called if that is the intended contract after this change.
• src/scoring/pending-pr-scenarios.ts and src/signals/contributor-open-pr-monitor.ts: consider sharing the repository-name equality helper instead of duplicating lowercasing at each call site.
• Readiness score is below the configured threshold — Use the readiness panel as advisory maintainer context; the score does not block this PR.
• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review — A maintainer must review and merge this change.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
Related work	⚠️ 1 scoped overlap	Top overlaps are listed below; lower-confidence bulk is hidden.
Change scope	❌ 8/20	High review scope from cached public metadata (size label size:S; no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 2 registered-repo PR(s), 2 merged, 280 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 2 PR(s), 280 issue(s).
Gate result	⚠️ Not blocking	Advisory; not blocking this PR.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 2 PR(s), 280 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (PR #1693)

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Explain no-issue PR.
• Review top overlaps.
• Add a concise scope and risk note.
• Triage stale or unlinked PRs.
• No action.
• Link the issue being solved, or explicitly explain why this is a no-issue PR.
• Check active issues and PRs before submitting.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by Gittensory, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run Gittensory review

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 95.56%. Comparing base (8652e6c) to head (0f62305).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1716      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.58%   95.56%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         204      204              
  Lines       22295    22296       +1     
  Branches     8053     8053              
==========================================
- Hits        21310    21307       -3     
  Misses        408      408              
- Partials      577      581       +4     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/scoring/pending-pr-scenarios.ts	93.90% <100.00%> (-2.40%)	⬇️
src/signals/contributor-open-pr-monitor.ts	96.22% <100.00%> (-1.89%)	⬇️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.