fix(review): honor autoCloseExemptLogins in closeDraftDodgeAttemptIfBlocked

[philluiz2323]

Summary

closeDraftDodgeAttemptIfBlocked was the one remaining review-evasion auto-close guard that did not call isProtectedAutomationAuthor or isAutoCloseExempt. Authors on the operator's autoCloseExemptLogins allowlist, or protected automation bots (dependabot[bot], etc.), were therefore still draft-dodge closed even though every sibling guard in src/queue/review-evasion.ts honors those exemptions — the same bug class fixed in #6165 on a different sibling.

Adds both exemption checks before the close decision, matching closeReviewEvasionSelfCloseIfReviewed and the other four guards.

Test plan

• test/unit/queue-lifecycle-guards.test.ts: gate-blocked PR converted to draft by an autoCloseExemptLogins author is NOT closed
• test/unit/queue-lifecycle-guards.test.ts: gate-blocked PR converted to draft by dependabot[bot] is NOT closed
• Targeted vitest run passes (2/2 new regression cases)

Closes #9294

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 75.51%. Comparing base (f7dda79) to head (6cdc4e1).
⚠️ Report is 14 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/queue/review-evasion.ts	50.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9369      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.38%   75.51%   +0.13%     
==========================================
  Files         275      277       +2     
  Lines       58023    58402     +379     
  Branches     6181     8330    +2149     
==========================================
+ Hits        43739    44105     +366     
- Misses      14014    14017       +3     
- Partials      270      280      +10     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	96.56% <50.00%> (?)

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/selfhost/metrics.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/queue/review-evasion.ts	95.34% <50.00%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-27 14:51:19 UTC}

6 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI failing · unstable

🛑 Suggested Action - Fix Blockers

Review summary
The core fix at src/queue/review-evasion.ts:293-294 adds the same isProtectedAutomationAuthor/isAutoCloseExempt early-return pair that every sibling review-evasion guard already has (closeRepeatedDraftCyclingIfDetected, closeDraftPrIfPolicyEnabled, closeSynchronizeAmendmentIfPolicyEnabled all use the identical `if (isProtectedAutomationAuthor(pr.authorLogin, env)) return;` / `if (isAutoCloseExempt(pr.authorLogin, settings.autoCloseExemptLogins)) return;` pattern), placed correctly before the close-decision `if (block && ...)` block so it short-circuits before any GitHub mutation. The two new regression tests in queue-lifecycle-guards.test.ts exercise both exemption arms end-to-end (allowlisted contributor, dependabot[bot]) and assert no PATCH close call and zero audit rows, which is a real test of the fixed path, not a fabricated one. The diff also bundles unrelated hunks (a new metrics entry in selfhost/metrics.ts, and test-only changes to worker-entry-boundary.test.ts, salvageability.test.ts, selfhost-pg-retention.test.ts) that reference issues #9150/#9065/#9230/#9085/#9237/#9083 with no connection to #9294 — given this branch is 14 commits behind default, these are very likely already-merged changes from other PRs surfacing in the diff view rather than scope creep introduced by this contributor, but it's worth confirming the actual PR diff on GitHub is scoped to review-evasion.ts + its own test before merging.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• The codecov/patch failure (50% vs 99% target) is plausibly explained by the unrelated bundled files (metrics.ts's two new DEFAULT_METRIC_META entries in particular) diluting patch coverage rather than by the actual 2-line fix, which is directly covered by the two new regression tests -- worth a quick check that the new metric entries are exercised elsewhere before assuming this is the cause.
• If the metrics.ts, worker-entry-boundary.test.ts, salvageability.test.ts, and selfhost-pg-retention.test.ts hunks are genuinely part of this PR's own commits (rather than base-branch drift), they should be split out since none of them relate to review: closeDraftDodgeAttemptIfBlocked skips the autoCloseExemptLogins allowlist its five siblings honor #9294's stated scope.
• Confirm on GitHub that this PR's diff, once rebased onto current default, only touches src/queue/review-evasion.ts and its own test file -- if the other four files are truly unrelated commits accidentally included, rebase/squash them out before merge.
• Consider adding a short comment above the two new early-returns (mirroring the sibling guards' own comments, e.g. 'fix(review): closeRepeatedDraftCyclingIfDetected skips the autoCloseExemptLogins allowlist its two siblings honor #6165') noting that this closes the same bug class as fix(review): closeRepeatedDraftCyclingIfDetected skips the autoCloseExemptLogins allowlist its two siblings honor #6165 for the draft-dodge guard specifically, for future grep-ability.

CI checks failing

• codecov/patch — 50.00% of diff hit (target 99.00%)

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	#9294
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: 986 registered-repo PR(s), 563 merged, 125 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	philluiz2323; Gittensor profile; 986 PR(s), 125 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff adds the isProtectedAutomationAuthor and isAutoCloseExempt checks to closeDraftDodgeAttemptIfBlocked in the same relative position as sibling guards, without touching the existing owner/admin/headSha conditions, and includes two new regression tests covering an autoCloseExemptLogins author and a protected automation author.

Review context

• Author: philluiz2323
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, JavaScript, MDX, TypeScript, CSS, Cuda, HTML, Kotlin
• Official Gittensor activity: 986 PR(s), 125 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 (codecov/patch)). 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.