[dezren39]

Closes #450.

Adds the two missing Done rows verified in #450:

• planning/roadmaps/repo-and-ci.md: PR fix(ci): push-to-main runs get their own concurrency group (run_id) in 9 workflows #428 (push-to-main runs get their own run_id concurrency group, closes CI: push-to-main verification runs share one cancellable group — 11 of the last 18 id-check main runs were cancelled by the next merge #392).
• planning/roadmaps/mcpx.md: PR docs(mcpx): name the downstream darwin -skip coupling on the canonical checkPhase line #445 (this repo's half of the mcpx: the darwin skip override in dezren39/nix keys on this repo's check-phase line with a silent replaceStrings — no automated guard against drift #418 darwin -skip drift-guard set, alongside dezren39/nix PR id(world): F11.11 enforce the client projection with a structural test #543).

Docs-only; diff is exactly +1 row per file. python3 scripts/research_workflow.py check --repo-root . returns ok:true.

---

^{Need help on this PR? Tag @codesmith-bot with what you need.}

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Updated project roadmaps to record completed improvements to Darwin override validation.
  • Documented dedicated concurrency handling for push-to-main workflow runs.
  • Added references to the related tracking issues for improved visibility into delivery status.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-21T02:08:06.900294Z	bf4c9f8	PR opened

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[coderabbitai]

Note

Currently processing new changes in this PR. This may take a few minutes, please wait...

⚙️ Run configuration

• Configuration used: defaults
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: 6ad52904-38b1-407b-ad07-950cf3ea3910

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 830a8ea and bf4c9f8.

📒 Files selected for processing: 2

• planning/roadmaps/mcpx.md
• planning/roadmaps/repo-and-ci.md

+------------------------------------------------------+
| CUDA: Carrot Utilization for Debugging Acceleration. |
+------------------------------------------------------+
  \
   \     /)/)
        ( '')
        /  |
      o(___)

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bf4c9f8c4b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Link the PR that actually implements the drift guard

The result points only to #445, but that PR merely adds comments and a test failure message; its own commit description says the actual throw, flake check, and CI evaluation that make drift fail loudly are implemented in dezren39/nix#543. A maintainer following this Done entry therefore cannot reach the implementation that substantiates the row, so include the downstream PR in the Result cell (as the roadmap already does for other cross-repository work).

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.