enable_status_check and required_approvals were set earlier today and recorded as done.
They did not bite. block_admin_merge_override was false, and Gitea lets repo admins
override merge requirements without it. jakman85 holds owner, so both requirements were
bypassable by exactly the account that performs every merge.
The evidence was already on the record: PRs #5-#9 all merged while required_approvals: 1
was in force, with ZERO approvals recorded on any of them.
Two process failures, both the same shape as the defect this whole session started with:
1. Verified with the wrong view. /branches/main reports protected, enable_status_check and
required_approvals but NOT block_admin_merge_override -- it showed everything green while
the rule was overridable. /branch_protections/main is authoritative.
2. Probed for a field name assumed to exist. This Gitea (1.24.3) has no `apply_to_admins`;
asking jq for it returns null, which reads like "set to false" but means "key absent", so
a PATCH that silently did nothing produced a convincing before/after. jq returning null
is not a value -- it may be an absence. Enumerate with to_entries.
require-gate.sh now sets block_admin_merge_override: true; block-admin-override.sh fixes it
in isolation. Both carry the field-name warning.
This PR is the test. If it merges WITHOUT an approval, the fix did not work.
Also records the governance question: with only jakman85 (human) and gitea-admin (agent),
a human-authored PR now needs the automation account to approve it. That is ceremony, not
review, and the choice between keeping it, dropping approvals in favour of the status
check, or adding a second human is the operator's to make.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
jakman85andClaude Opus 5