Skip to content

🎨 Palette: 비동기 λ²„νŠΌ λ‘œλ”© μƒνƒœ κ°œμ„  (쑰직 λͺ¨λ‹¬) - #400

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 2 commits into
developmentalfrom
palette-async-button-spinners-16180310049095241756
Open

🎨 Palette: 비동기 λ²„νŠΌ λ‘œλ”© μƒνƒœ κ°œμ„  (쑰직 λͺ¨λ‹¬)#400
seonghobae wants to merge 2 commits into
developmentalfrom
palette-async-button-spinners-16180310049095241756

Conversation

@seonghobae

@seonghobae seonghobae commented Aug 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

πŸ’‘ What: 쑰직 생성 및 μ‚­μ œ λͺ¨λ‹¬μ˜ μ™„λ£Œ(제좜) λ²„νŠΌμ— 비동기 처리 μ€‘μž„μ„ λ‚˜νƒ€λ‚΄λŠ” μŠ€ν”Όλ„ˆ(Loader2)λ₯Ό μΆ”κ°€ν–ˆμŠ΅λ‹ˆλ‹€.
🎯 Why: ν…μŠ€νŠΈ λ³€κ²½(예: '생성 쀑…')λ§ŒμœΌλ‘œλŠ” μ§„ν–‰ 상황이 λˆˆμ— 띄지 μ•Šμ„ 수 μžˆμ–΄, μŠ€ν”Όλ„ˆλ₯Ό 톡해 μ‚¬μš©μžμ—κ²Œ λͺ…ν™•ν•œ μ‹œκ°μ  ν”Όλ“œλ°±μ„ μ œκ³΅ν•˜κ³ μž ν•©λ‹ˆλ‹€.
πŸ“Έ Before/After: λ²„νŠΌ ν…μŠ€νŠΈ μ’ŒμΈ‘μ— νšŒμ „ν•˜λŠ” μŠ€ν”Όλ„ˆ μ•„μ΄μ½˜ μΆ”κ°€
β™Ώ Accessibility: μŠ€ν”Όλ„ˆ μ•„μ΄μ½˜μ— aria-hidden="true"λ₯Ό μ μš©ν•˜μ—¬ 슀크린 λ¦¬λ”μ—μ„œ λΆˆν•„μš”ν•œ 정보가 μ½νžˆμ§€ μ•Šλ„λ‘ μ²˜λ¦¬ν–ˆμŠ΅λ‹ˆλ‹€.


PR created automatically by Jules for task 16180310049095241756 started by @seonghobae

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • κ°œμ„  사항
    • 쑰직 생성 및 μ‚­μ œ μš”μ²­ 쀑 λ²„νŠΌμ— νšŒμ „ν•˜λŠ” λ‘œλ”© μ•„μ΄μ½˜μ„ ν‘œμ‹œν•©λ‹ˆλ‹€.
    • μž‘μ—… μ§„ν–‰ μƒνƒœλ₯Ό μ‹œκ°μ μœΌλ‘œ 전달해 더 λͺ…ν™•ν•˜κ³  μ ‘κ·Όμ„± 높은 μ‚¬μš©μž κ²½ν—˜μ„ μ œκ³΅ν•©λ‹ˆλ‹€.

@google-labs-jules

Copy link
Copy Markdown

πŸ‘‹ Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a πŸ‘€ emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.


For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Review Change Stack

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. πŸŽ‰

ℹ️ Recent review info
βš™οΈ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 353becf5-468a-4a4a-a04b-bd8f1526e4a4

πŸ“₯ Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a5be9b0 and 4a7698e.

πŸ“’ Files selected for processing (3)
  • .Jules/palette.md
  • packages/web/src/components/org/create-org-modal.tsx
  • packages/web/src/components/org/delete-org-modal.tsx

πŸ“ Walkthrough

Walkthrough

쑰직 생성 및 μ‚­μ œ λͺ¨λ‹¬μ˜ μš”μ²­ μ§„ν–‰ 쀑 λ²„νŠΌμ— νšŒμ „ν˜• Loader2 μ•„μ΄μ½˜μ„ μΆ”κ°€ν–ˆμŠ΅λ‹ˆλ‹€. 비동기 제좜 λ²„νŠΌμ˜ λ‘œλ”© μƒνƒœ ν‘œμ‹œ 지침도 λ¬Έμ„œμ— κΈ°λ‘ν–ˆμŠ΅λ‹ˆλ‹€.

Changes

쑰직 λͺ¨λ‹¬ λ‘œλ”© μƒνƒœ

Layer / File(s) Summary
비동기 λ²„νŠΌ λ‘œλ”© ν‘œμ‹œ
.Jules/palette.md, packages/web/src/components/org/create-org-modal.tsx, packages/web/src/components/org/delete-org-modal.tsx
쑰직 생성 및 μ‚­μ œ μš”μ²­ 쀑 λ²„νŠΌμ— νšŒμ „ν˜• Loader2 μ•„μ΄μ½˜μ„ ν‘œμ‹œν•©λ‹ˆλ‹€. 비동기 제좜 λ²„νŠΌμ— λ‘œλ”© μŠ€ν”Όλ„ˆλ₯Ό μ‚¬μš©ν•˜λŠ” 지침을 μΆ”κ°€ν–ˆμŠ΅λ‹ˆλ‹€.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes

πŸš₯ Pre-merge checks | βœ… 5
βœ… Passed checks (5 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check βœ… Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check βœ… Passed 제λͺ©μ€ 쑰직 λͺ¨λ‹¬μ˜ 비동기 λ²„νŠΌ λ‘œλ”© μƒνƒœ κ°œμ„ μ΄λΌλŠ” μ£Όμš” λ³€κ²½ 사항을 λͺ…ν™•ν•˜κ²Œ μ„€λͺ…ν•©λ‹ˆλ‹€.
Docstring Coverage βœ… Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check βœ… Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check βœ… Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
✨ Finishing Touches
πŸ“ Generate docstrings
  • Create stacked PR
  • Commit on current branch
πŸ§ͺ Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch palette-async-button-spinners-16180310049095241756

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 4a7698e298758165daeea9e60a476447cc591bec.

  • Head SHA: 4a7698e298758165daeea9e60a476447cc591bec

  • Workflow run: 31296534181

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Loading

@opencode-agent

opencode-agent Bot commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

OpenCode Review Overview

  • Head SHA: 4a7698e298758165daeea9e60a476447cc591bec
  • Workflow run: 31296534181
  • Workflow attempt: 1
  • Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 4a7698e298758165daeea9e60a476447cc591bec.

  • Head SHA: 4a7698e298758165daeea9e60a476447cc591bec

  • Workflow run: 31296534181

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Loading

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.

1 participant