test(scoring): cover pending-pr helpers' ghost-login exclusion and case-insensitive matching

[jeffrey701]

What

src/scoring/pending-pr-scenarios.ts's two filter helpers had a real branch-coverage gap on
the logic that decides which of a contributor's open PRs count toward their pending-PR signals:

• sameLogin's value && short-circuit — which exists to exclude ghost/deleted GitHub
  accounts whose authorLogin is null/undefined (PullRequestRecord.authorLogin is typed
  string | null | undefined) — had no test proving the falsy-value side (a null login is
  excluded, not matched or thrown).
• The .toLowerCase() case-normalization in both sameLogin and sameRepoFullName — GitHub
  owner/repo and login are case-insensitive but stored values aren't guaranteed consistent —
  had no test proving a case-only difference still matches.

Every existing test set authorLogin to a concrete same-case string, so neither branch was
exercised.

Change

Pure test addition (no source change) in test/unit/pending-pr-scenarios.test.ts: one case
feeding loadContributorRepoOpenPrSignalRecords four PRs —

• authorLogin: null and authorLogin: undefined for the searched login → both excluded
  (covers sameLogin's falsy-value short-circuit);
• a repoFullName differing only in case → included (covers sameRepoFullName's
  case-normalization);
• an authorLogin differing only in case → included (covers sameLogin's truthy side +
  case-normalization).

The per-PR review mock lets the test assert exactly which pull numbers survive the filter
([82, 83]), pinning the include/exclude outcome for each branch.

Validation

• npx vitest run test/unit/pending-pr-scenarios.test.ts → all pass.
• Full npm run test:changed net green (modulo the pre-existing Windows-only
  subprocess/symlink baseline failures that pass on Linux CI).

Closes #8329

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-24 14:47:40 UTC}

1 file · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI failing · blocked

🛑 Suggested Action - Fix Blockers

Review summary
Pure test-only addition covering two previously-untested branches in pending-pr-scenarios.ts: sameLogin's falsy-value short-circuit (null/undefined authorLogin excluded) and case-insensitive matching for both sameLogin and sameRepoFullName. The test correctly sets up four PRs, mocks per-pull-number reviews, and asserts the exact surviving pull numbers ([82, 83]), which pins both the exclude and include outcomes precisely rather than just checking a count. This is a well-targeted, narrowly-scoped coverage fix that closes the linked issue #8329.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• The FAILED validate/validate-tests-merge checks are undetailed and this branch is 2 commits behind default — likely stale-branch noise rather than a defect in this diff, worth a rebase to confirm.
• test/unit/pending-pr-scenarios.test.ts: the inline comments after each `pr({...})` call are a bit redundant with the block comment above the `it`, though not harmful.
• Consider also asserting `records.pullRequestChecks` length in the new test for symmetry with the existing 'loads cached reviews and checks' test, since `listCheckSummaries` is mocked but never asserted on.

CI checks failing

• validate
• validate-tests-merge

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	#8329
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: 66 registered-repo PR(s), 31 merged, 17 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	jeffrey701; Gittensor profile; 66 PR(s), 17 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ Insufficient signal	risk: clean · value: insufficient-signal · LLM: minor

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The added test exercises all four requested branches—null and undefined authorLogin (excluded), and case-differing repoFullName and login (both included)—matching the issue's explicit requirements and asserting the correct include/exclude outcomes.

Review context

• Author: jeffrey701
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Rust, TypeScript, Clojure, JavaScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 66 PR(s), 17 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Triage stale or unlinked PRs.

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

[loopover-orb]

LoopOver is closing this pull request on the maintainer's behalf (CI is failing (validate, validate-tests-merge)). This is an automated maintenance action — to pursue this change, please open a new pull request with the issues resolved. Closed PRs may be analyzed later to improve review accuracy, but they are not automatically reopened or re-reviewed.