fix(orb): align derivePublicCommentMergeFacts' neverClosed with the planner's close-eligibility formula

[kai392]

Summary

derivePublicCommentMergeFacts computed neverClosed from only authorLogin === repoOwner || isProtectedAutomationAuthor, diverging from the real close-eligibility formula the planner uses
(closeWithheldReason in this file, and agent-actions.ts's closeEligible):
(authorIsOwner || authorIsAdmin) && closeOwnerAuthors !== true.

Two consequences fixed:

• A per-repo admin (non-owner) author was wrongly shown as closable, even though the planner
  protects them the same as the owner.
• An owner-authored PR on a closeOwnerAuthors: true repo was wrongly shown as un-closable
  ("held"), even though the planner can actually close it.

The caller resolves the author's live per-repo admin status via isPerTenantAdmin (the same source
the freeze-exemption check already uses) and threads it plus closeOwnerAuthors (through the
existing settings) into the pure function.

Test plan

• New: neverClosed is false for an owner-authored PR once closeOwnerAuthors: true (was true)
• New: neverClosed is true for a per-repo admin (non-owner) author without closeOwnerAuthors
• Existing neverClosed cases (contributor, plain owner, protected automation, missing login) unchanged
• Non-vacuity verified: reverting the formula makes both new tests fail
• Full branch coverage of the new formula; tsc --noEmit clean; all touched unit tests green

Closes #8683

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.19%. Comparing base (476b98d) to head (cdc8762).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8786      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.56%   91.19%   +0.63%     
==========================================
  Files          96       97       +1     
  Lines       22490    25690    +3200     
  Branches     3884     5022    +1138     
==========================================
+ Hits        20367    23429    +3062     
- Misses       1945     1994      +49     
- Partials      178      267      +89     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	95.68% <100.00%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/queue/processors.ts	95.68% <100.00%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-26 05:53:05 UTC}

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

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This PR aligns derivePublicCommentMergeFacts' neverClosed formula with the planner's real close-eligibility logic by threading in a caller-resolved authorIsAdmin flag and the closeOwnerAuthors setting, fixing two divergence cases: non-owner admins wrongly shown as closable, and closeOwnerAuthors-opted-in owners wrongly shown as held. The caller wiring resolves authorIsAdmin via isPerTenantAdmin (the same source the freeze-exemption check already uses), and the accompanying tests cover both new branches plus regression-check the prior cases, closing issue #8683.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• src/queue/processors.ts: `String(author)` is used to coerce a possibly-null author into isPerTenantAdmin — worth confirming isPerTenantAdmin treats the literal string "null"/"undefined" as a safe not-admin rather than accidentally matching a real login named that way.
• The new isPerTenantAdmin call adds a network/DB round trip on every maybePublishPrPublicSurface invocation; since this only affects the public comment's neverClosed framing rather than the merge/close decision itself, consider whether this needs to be as eager as the freeze-exemption check it piggybacks on.
• src/queue/processors.ts: consider caching or batching the isPerTenantAdmin lookup if it's already computed for the freeze-exemption check nearby, to avoid a duplicate lookup for the same author/repo pair.

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (1 reviewer)
• ✅ Gate result — Passing (No configured blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#8683
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 153 registered-repo PR(s), 81 merged, 6 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	kai392; Gittensor profile; 153 PR(s), 6 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff updates derivePublicCommentMergeFacts's neverClosed formula to (authorIsOwner || authorIsAdmin) && closeOwnerAuthors !== true, matching closeWithheldReason, threads a caller-resolved authorIsAdmin via isPerTenantAdmin, and adds the two required tests plus preserves existing cases.

Review context

• Author: kai392
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, Cuda, JavaScript, Kotlin, Perl, TypeScript, Vue
• Official Gittensor activity: 153 PR(s), 6 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Keep the PR focused and include validation evidence before maintainer review.

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.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

_{🟩 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 LoopOver, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run LoopOver review