Skip to content

README: clarify --verify-local is coverage only - #241

Merged
nodeselector merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
nodeselector-readme-verify-local-limits
Oct 22, 2026
Merged

nodeselector merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
nodeselector-readme-verify-local-limits

Conversation

@nodeselector

@nodeselector nodeselector commented Oct 22, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Notes in the modes table and Limitations that --verify-local is an offline coverage check that does not verify provenance, while --verify and the runner do.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot AI max review requested due to automatic review settings October 22, 2026 16:16
@nodeselector
nodeselector requested a review from a team as a code owner October 22, 2026 16:16
Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
@nodeselector
nodeselector merged commit 306099f into main Oct 22, 2026
11 checks passed

Copilot AI 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.

🟢 Approval recommended

The documentation accurately describes existing verification behavior, with no blocking issues identified.

No open issues 🎉

What changed in this PR

Clarifies that --verify-local checks lockfile coverage, not entry trustworthiness, aligning the README with existing CLI help and skill documentation.

Changes:

  • Labels --verify-local as coverage-only in the modes table.
  • Explains that forged entries can pass and recommends --verify for CI.
File Description
README.md Clarifies verification limits and CI guidance; no code changes.

Review effort: Max

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.

2 participants