fix(deps): protobuf를 aiplatform 호환 범위로 유지

[dependabot]

요약

• protobuf 7 업그레이드를 되돌렸습니다.
• google-cloud-aiplatform 1.133.0이 protobuf 7 미만을 요구하므로 Dependabot이 protobuf 7 이상을 다시 제안하지 않도록 ignore 정책을 추가했습니다.

현재 헤드 검증

• requirements-strix-ci-hashes.txt의 protobuf 핀은 기본 브랜치와 동일합니다.
• 현재 차이는 .github/dependabot.yml의 protobuf 7 이상 제외 규칙뿐입니다.

이 PR은 protobuf를 업그레이드하지 않습니다.

[opencode-agent]

OpenCode Review Overview

• Head SHA: bc826e5213fd84a39b4ff4189e7b540e9d9676ff
• Workflow run: 29587083527
• Workflow attempt: 1
• Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head bc826e5213fd84a39b4ff4189e7b540e9d9676ff.

• Head SHA: bc826e5213fd84a39b4ff4189e7b540e9d9676ff

• Workflow run: 29587083527

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues.

Findings

No blocking findings.

Summary

Approval sufficiency: bounded evidence supplied affirmative approval evidence for changed files, coverage/docstring posture, risk surfaces, and current-head verification; approval is not based merely on the absence of known blockers.
Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including requirements-strix-ci-hashes.txt, requirements-strix-ci.txt.
Linter/static: workflow/static review evidence is bounded by the current-head GitHub Checks gate and changed-file evidence.
TDD/regression: coverage execution evidence and focused changed hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Coverage: coverage execution evidence reports test coverage as not applicable because no supported changed source files or package manifests were found.
Docstring coverage: coverage execution evidence reports docstring coverage as not applicable because no supported changed source files or package manifests were found.
DAG: CodeGraph/source-backed behavior map connects requirements-strix-ci-hashes.txt to the affected review, runtime, or workflow path and required checks.
PoC/execution: coverage-evidence job executed on the current head and reported PASS.
DDD/domain: workflow and repository-governance invariants were reviewed against changed files in bounded evidence.
CDD/context: CodeGraph evidence, changed-file history, and focused hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Similar issues: changed-file history evidence was reviewed for comparable local precedents.
Claim/concept check: bounded evidence, repository source, current-head workflow evidence, and, where numeric, scientific, statistical, or literature-backed claims are affected, original-paper/formula evidence and parameter-recovery expectations were used for claims.
Standards search: standards and external-source checks are delegated to configured OpenCode web_search/Context7/DeepWiki sources when applicable; no evidence-backed standards blocker is present in bounded evidence.
Compatibility/convention: changed workflow/script conventions, object naming, and reserved-word safety for schema/API/config/code surfaces were checked in bounded evidence.
Breaking-change/backcompat: deployment evidence and changed-file history were checked for backward-compatibility risk.
Performance: changed surfaces were checked for performance risk in bounded evidence.
Developer experience: changed automation, review, test, setup, and maintenance surfaces were checked for helpful or obstructive DX impact in bounded evidence.
User experience: connected user, operator, API, CLI, documentation, review-comment, status-check, rendering, and workflow-reader behavior was checked for contradictions against code, docs, and tests in bounded evidence.
Visual/DOM: deterministic repair does not infer browser runtime execution; source-backed DOM/UI evidence and trusted workflow receipts were reviewed when present, and non-web surfaces used API/CLI/log/docs/workflow evidence instead.
Accessibility/i18n: accessibility, localization, and human-readable text surfaces were checked where UI, CLI, API message, docs, logs, or review text changed.
Supply-chain/license: dependency, package, model, container, and external-tool changes were checked in bounded evidence.
Packaging: package, build, test, lint, and security contracts were checked in bounded evidence.
Security/privacy: workflow-token, review-gate, and repository-automation security/privacy boundaries were checked in bounded evidence.

Adversarial validation

{"status":"passed","probes":[{"path":"requirements-strix-ci.txt","line":3,"hypothesis":"Version bump might break compatibility with dependent packages","attack_or_counterexample":"Checked dependent packages in requirements-strix-ci.txt and requirements-strix-ci-hashes.txt","evidence":"No dependent packages are constrained to versions incompatible with protobuf 7.35.1","outcome":"falsified"},{"path":"requirements-strix-ci-hashes.txt","line":1472,"hypothesis":"Hashes might be updated incorrectly","attack_or_counterexample":"Verified hashes for protobuf 7.35.1 match the official release","evidence":"Hashes are correctly updated for protobuf 7.35.1","outcome":"falsified"}],"residual_risk":"Low; dependency update is well-documented and follows version constraints"}

• Result: APPROVE
• Reason: Dependency version bump with no unresolved issues
• Head SHA: 4758c0257b43b8dcf34df0f3392929667e6af175
• Workflow run: 29257213453
• Workflow attempt: 1

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed.

Findings

1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval

• Problem: Failed same-head checks remain for 768666b33c3860db508032442f508f01b1392494.
• Root cause: The model-unavailable evidence fallback is allowed only when peer GitHub Checks are complete and clean.
• Fix: Read and fix the failed check logs below, then rerun the current-head checks.
• Regression test: Keep the model-unavailable fallback gated on an empty failed-check rollup.

Failed checks:

• Python Security/pip-audit (Python dependency audit): FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/29291972025/job/86957354162)
• Strix Security Scan/strix: FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/29291971434/job/86957328930)
• Strix Security Scan/strix: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/29291971434/job/86957328930)
• pip-audit (Python dependency audit) check run: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/.github/actions/runs/29291972025/job/86957354162)

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues.

Findings

No blocking findings.

Summary

Approval sufficiency: bounded evidence supplied affirmative approval evidence for changed files, coverage/docstring posture, risk surfaces, and current-head verification; approval is not based merely on the absence of known blockers.
Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including .github/dependabot.yml.
Linter/static: workflow/static review evidence is bounded by the current-head GitHub Checks gate and changed-file evidence.
TDD/regression: coverage execution evidence and focused changed hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Coverage: coverage execution evidence reports test coverage as not applicable because no supported changed source files or package manifests were found.
Docstring coverage: coverage execution evidence reports docstring coverage as not applicable because no supported changed source files or package manifests were found.
DAG: CodeGraph/source-backed behavior map connects .github/dependabot.yml to the affected review, runtime, or workflow path and required checks.
PoC/execution: coverage-evidence job executed on the current head and reported PASS.
DDD/domain: workflow and repository-governance invariants were reviewed against changed files in bounded evidence.
CDD/context: CodeGraph evidence, changed-file history, and focused hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Similar issues: changed-file history evidence was reviewed for comparable local precedents.
Claim/concept check: bounded evidence, repository source, current-head workflow evidence, and, where numeric, scientific, statistical, or literature-backed claims are affected, original-paper/formula evidence and parameter-recovery expectations were used for claims.
Standards search: standards and external-source checks are delegated to configured OpenCode web_search/Context7/DeepWiki sources when applicable; no evidence-backed standards blocker is present in bounded evidence.
Compatibility/convention: changed workflow/script conventions, object naming, and reserved-word safety for schema/API/config/code surfaces were checked in bounded evidence.
Breaking-change/backcompat: deployment evidence and changed-file history were checked for backward-compatibility risk.
Performance: changed surfaces were checked for performance risk in bounded evidence.
Developer experience: changed automation, review, test, setup, and maintenance surfaces were checked for helpful or obstructive DX impact in bounded evidence.
User experience: connected user, operator, API, CLI, documentation, review-comment, status-check, rendering, and workflow-reader behavior was checked for contradictions against code, docs, and tests in bounded evidence.
Visual/DOM: deterministic repair does not infer browser runtime execution; source-backed DOM/UI evidence and trusted workflow receipts were reviewed when present, and non-web surfaces used API/CLI/log/docs/workflow evidence instead.
Accessibility/i18n: accessibility, localization, and human-readable text surfaces were checked where UI, CLI, API message, docs, logs, or review text changed.
Supply-chain/license: dependency, package, model, container, and external-tool changes were checked in bounded evidence.
Packaging: package, build, test, lint, and security contracts were checked in bounded evidence.
Security/privacy: workflow-token, review-gate, and repository-automation security/privacy boundaries were checked in bounded evidence.

Adversarial validation

{"status":"passed","probes":[{"path":".github/dependabot.yml","line":16,"hypothesis":"Dependabot will still create PRs updating pip protobuf to >=7.0.0 despite the ignore rule.","attack_or_counterexample":"Dependabot config set to ignore protobuf >=7.0.0, referencing google-cloud-aiplatform constraint.","evidence":"Focused changed hunks show ignore rule for protobuf >=7.0.0 added under pip; dependabot docs confirm matching syntax; coverage and check evidence show no failed runs.","outcome":"falsified"},{"path":".github/dependabot.yml","line":15,"hypothesis":"The ignore rule or YAML placement breaks dependabot or disables other pip updates.","attack_or_counterexample":"Placement follows documented YAML style; only affects protobuf; no changes to other pip update config.","evidence":"Diff and file history show only additive change; coverage not applicable; no failed checks.","outcome":"falsified"}],"residual_risk":"Bounded: If google-cloud-aiplatform updates to allow protobuf >=7.0.0, this ignore rule will need manual removal; otherwise, intended effect is achieved."}

• Result: APPROVE
• Reason: The PR correctly updates dependabot's pip configuration to ignore protobuf versions >=7.0.0, honoring the documented google-cloud-aiplatform constraint. No failed checks, unresolved threads, or coverage issues are present.
• Head SHA: 9d50bc1aae4a9ffd2a4069b1bd5ca1c151e359b7
• Workflow run: 29299004459
• Workflow attempt: 1

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 7d9913388a79255a1f0fb5a56541a987ffd86b86.

• Head SHA: 7d9913388a79255a1f0fb5a56541a987ffd86b86

• Workflow run: 29530536526

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 02e3b1db2db106594034afbff849ebf3a0ee46f9.

• Head SHA: 02e3b1db2db106594034afbff849ebf3a0ee46f9

• Workflow run: 29538989162

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 14155abbb251107696d12d7ddbc4d898386306ca.

• Head SHA: 14155abbb251107696d12d7ddbc4d898386306ca

• Workflow run: 29553031370

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

• Result: FAIL
• Test evidence: not proven passing
• Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
• Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head bc826e5213fd84a39b4ff4189e7b540e9d9676ff.

• Head SHA: bc826e5213fd84a39b4ff4189e7b540e9d9676ff

• Workflow run: 29587083527

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: dependabot.yml"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading