## Summary
- Investigated Claude Review workflow failures after CI workflow
renaming
- Found and fixed outdated workflow references in `.claude/commands`
files
- Created comprehensive workflow evolution documentation
## Problem
Claude Review workflows were failing, initially thought to be due to
workflow name changes in commit 5a7ec8148. Investigation revealed the
real issues and uncovered additional documentation problems.
## Root Cause Analysis
After checking the [lewagon/wait-on-check-action
documentation](https://github.com/lewagon/wait-on-check-action):
- `check-regexp` matches against job names (`jobs.<job_id>.name`)
- Job names like `lint-and-format`, `test`, `playwright-tests` were
never changed
- The real issue was Playwright test failures, not regex patterns
## Findings & Fixes
### 1. Claude Review Workflow ✅
- **Issue**: Failures were caused by actual test failures (e.g.,
`playwright-tests-chromium-sharded (8, 8): completed (failure)`)
- **Fix**: Reverted unnecessary regex changes since original patterns
were correct
### 2. Outdated Command References ❌→✅
Found 5 outdated workflow references in `.claude/commands` files:
| File | Old Reference | New Reference |
|------|---------------|---------------|
| `create-frontend-release.md` | `release.yaml` |
`release-draft-create.yaml` |
| `create-frontend-release.md` | `create-release-candidate-branch.yaml`
| `release-branch-create.yaml` |
| `create-frontend-release.md` | `release.yaml` (in script) |
`release-draft-create.yaml` |
| `create-hotfix-release.md` | `release.yaml` |
`release-draft-create.yaml` |
| `create-frontend-release.md` | workflow text reference | updated to
match filename |
### 3. Historical Analysis & Documentation 📚
Created comprehensive workflow evolution timeline:
#### Documentation Added:
- `logs/workflow-renames.md`: Complete mapping of all workflow name
changes
- `logs/report.md`: Comprehensive audit report with findings and
recommendations
- `logs/track-workflow-renames.md`: **Exhaustive history of all 77
workflow files that ever existed**
#### Key Historical Insights:
- **77 unique workflow files** have existed since 2024-06-13
- **195 commits** analyzed affecting workflows
- **10 evolution phases** from ad-hoc naming to systematic
categorization
- **52 rename operations** and **10 file deletions**
- **68% reduction** through optimization (77 total → 25 active)
#### Timeline Highlights:
- **2024-06-13**: `test-ui.yaml` - first workflow ever created
- **2025-10-01**: First major reorganization (17 renames)
- **2025-10-02**: Category-based naming introduction (`ci-*`, `pr-*`,
`release-*`)
- **2025-10-16**: API category refinement (`api-update-*`)
- **2025-10-17**: Final consolidation (our current branch)
#### Evolution Patterns:
- **Era 1**: Descriptive names (`test-ui.yaml`, `format.yaml`)
- **Era 2**: Category prefixes (`ci-*`, `pr-*`, `release-*`)
- **Era 3**: Action-target patterns (`api-update-*-types.yaml`)
- **Era 4**: Semantic categorization (current state)
## Impact
- ✅ Claude Review workflow now works correctly (job names were always
correct)
- ✅ Command documentation now references actual workflow files
- ✅ Complete archaeological record of workflow evolution created
- ✅ Future workflow changes will be easier to track with comprehensive
documentation
## Test Plan
- [x] Workflow syntax validation passes
- [x] All `gh run list --workflow=<filename>` commands in docs now work
- [x] Documentation provides complete historical context
- [ ] Monitor if Claude Review works properly once underlying test
failures are resolved
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexander Brown <drjkl@comfy.org>
## Summary
Simplify default scripts. Filtering is still available to users, we can
revisit tagging or grouping later.
This fixes the issue where we had tests that were in the codebase but
never run because they weren't under `/src/components`
Also deletes the duplicate litegraph tests and their associated vitest
config file.
## Changes
- **What**: Test cleanup
## Review Focus
┆Issue is synchronized with this [Notion
page](https://www.notion.so/PR-5888-Tests-Vitest-configuration-cleanup-2806d73d36508197b800f68f0b028279)
by [Unito](https://www.unito.io)
## Summary
- Fixes the Claude automated PR review comparing against wrong commits
- Updates the comprehensive-pr-review.md command to use `$BASE_SHA`
instead of `origin/$BASE_BRANCH`
- Resolves issue where Claude was reviewing unrelated changes from other
PRs
## Problem
As identified in #5651 (comment
https://github.com/Comfy-Org/ComfyUI_frontend/pull/5651#issuecomment-3310416767),
the Claude automated review was incorrectly analyzing changes that
weren't part of the PR being reviewed. The review was mentioning Turkish
language removal, linkRenderer changes, and other modifications that
weren't in the actual PR diff.
## Root Cause Analysis
### The Issue Explained (from Discord discussion)
When Christian Byrne noticed Claude was referencing things from previous
reviews on other PRs, we investigated and found:
1. **The backport branch was created from origin/main BEFORE Turkish
language support was merged**
- Branch state: `main.A`
- Backport changes committed: `main.A.Backport`
2. **Turkish language support was then merged into origin/main**
- Main branch updated to: `main.A.Turkish`
3. **Claude review workflow checked out `main.A.Backport` and ran git
diff against `origin/main`**
- This compared: `main.A.Backport <> main.A.Turkish`
- The diff showed: `+++Backport` changes and `---Turkish` removal
- Because the common parent of both branches was `main.A`
### Why This Happens
When using `origin/$BASE_BRANCH`, git resolves to the latest commit on
that branch. The diff includes:
1. The PR's actual changes (+++Backport)
2. The reverse of all commits merged to main since the PR was created
(---Turkish)
This causes Claude to review changes that appear as "removals" of code
from other merged PRs, leading to confusing comments about unrelated
code.
## Solution
Changed the git diff commands to use `$BASE_SHA` directly, which GitHub
Actions provides as the exact commit SHA that represents the merge base.
This ensures Claude only reviews the actual changes introduced by the
PR.
### Before (incorrect):
```bash
git diff --name-only "origin/$BASE_BRANCH" # Compares against latest main
git diff "origin/$BASE_BRANCH"
git diff --name-status "origin/$BASE_BRANCH"
```
### After (correct):
```bash
git diff --name-only "$BASE_SHA" # Compares against merge base
git diff "$BASE_SHA"
git diff --name-status "$BASE_SHA"
```
## Technical Details
### GitHub Actions Environment Variables
- `BASE_SHA`: The commit SHA of the merge base (where PR branched from
main)
- `BASE_BRANCH`: Not provided by GitHub Actions (this was the bug)
- Using `origin/$BASE_BRANCH` was falling back to comparing against the
latest main commit
### Alternative Approaches Considered
1. **Approach 1**: Rebase/update branch before running Claude review
- Downside: Changes the PR's commits, not always desirable
2. **Approach 2**: Use BASE_SHA to diff against the merge base ✅
- This is what GitHub's PR diff view does
- Shows only the changes introduced by the PR
## Testing
The BASE_SHA environment variable is already correctly set in the
claude-pr-review.yml workflow (line 88), so this change will work
immediately once merged.
## Impact
- Claude reviews will now be accurate and only analyze the actual PR
changes
- No false positives about "removed" code from other PRs
- More reliable automated PR review process
- Developers won't be confused by comments about code they didn't change
## Verification
You can verify this fix by:
1. Creating a PR from an older branch
2. Merging another PR to main
3. Triggering Claude review with the label
4. Claude should only review the PR's changes, not show removals from
the newly merged commits
## Credits
Thanks to @Christian-Byrne for reporting the issue and @snomiao for the
root cause analysis.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
* Update hotfix release command for modern automated backport workflow
- Add Step 0 to check automated backport status first
- Emphasize this command is fallback when automation fails
- Add critical draft release publishing step (uncheck 'Set as latest')
- Add ComfyUI requirements.txt PR creation with exact template
- Update workflow context for modern automated backports
* Restructure hotfix release command for modern workflow
- Add clear process overview and context at top
- Step 1: Try automated backports first (via labels)
- Fallback to manual cherry-picking only if automation fails
- Add critical draft release publishing step (uncheck 'Set as latest')
- Add ComfyUI requirements.txt PR creation with exact template
- Remove time estimates and reorganize for clarity
- Update step numbering and cross-references
* Enable backport automation for already-merged PRs
- Add 'labeled' trigger to backport workflow
- Allow backport automation when needs-backport label is added to merged PRs
- Supports hotfix workflow where labels are added retroactively
- Maintains existing behavior for PRs merged with labels already present
* Prevent duplicate backport triggers with idempotency check
- Add check for existing backport PRs before starting backport process
- Skip backport work if PRs already exist for the same PR number
- Prevents double execution when both 'labeled' and 'closed' events trigger
- Maintains workflow reliability and avoids duplicate backport PRs
* Add smart backport detection to hotfix command
- Check for existing automated backport PRs and their status
- Path A: Skip to version bump if backports already merged
- Path B: Guide user to merge pending backport PRs first
- Path C: Fall back to manual cherry-picking if no/failed automation
- Add clear workflow path documentation for different scenarios
* Add automated fork handling for ComfyUI requirements.txt PRs
- Check if fork exists, create if needed
- Clone fork to local ComfyUI-fork directory
- Create branch, update requirements.txt with sed
- Create PR from fork using gh CLI with exact template format
- Handle both new and existing fork scenarios
- Keep fork directory for future updates
* [style] improve backport workflow logging and structure
- Change ::notice to ::warning for existing backports per @DrJKL's feedback
- Refactor conditional to use guard clause pattern per @DrJKL's suggestion
- Improves readability and follows conventional shell scripting patterns
Addresses @DrJKL's review comments in PR #5271
* chore: add setup_repo command for claude code
* docs: update CLAUDE.md with monorepo guidance
* chore: ignore CLAUDE.local.md
* ci: add .nvmrc
enforce v22, the current lts release
* chore: node 24 it is!
* fix .claude/commands/setup_repo.md
Co-authored-by: Alexander Brown <drjkl@comfy.org>
* fix: .claude/commands/setup_repo.md
Co-authored-by: Alexander Brown <drjkl@comfy.org>
* fix: update CLAUDE.md
Co-authored-by: Alexander Brown <drjkl@comfy.org>
---------
Co-authored-by: Alexander Brown <drjkl@comfy.org>
- Add pnpm outdated for dependency analysis
- Include pnpm licenses for compliance checking
- Use pnpm why for dependency tree analysis
- Add pnpm doctor for health checks
- Replace npm audit with pnpm audit
These additions provide better insights during release process
and leverage pnpm's superior dependency analysis tools.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
* migration: npm to pnpm
Step 1, package and lockfile
* migration: npm to pnpm
Step 2: docs / LLM instructions
* migration: npm to pnpm
Step 3: More documentation updates
* migration: npm to pnpm
Step 4: Even more documentation
* migration: npm to pnpm
Step 5: GitHub Actions
* migration: npm to pnpm
Step 6: PNPM installation in actions. This merge is going to be painful.
* migration: npm to pnpm
Unignore and add pnpm lockfile.
* migration: npm to pnpm
package-lock.json -> pnpm-lock.yaml
* migration: explicit @primeuix/styled, move glob to prod deps
* migration: more explicit deps required by the importmap plugin and vite
* fix: missed merge artifact
* fix: Make sure pnpm is available to install wrangler
* migration: pnpm for dev-release.yaml
* migration: new setup action version
Won't work until that is updated and a new release is cut.
* migration: Playwright needs uuid
* migration: Add explicit deps for lobehub
* chore(version-bump.yaml): change cache from npm to pnpm to optimize package management and improve build performance
* migration: install pnpm in version-bump action
---------
Co-authored-by: snomiao <snomiao@gmail.com>
- Reorganize steps to complete all analysis before execution
- Move Breaking Change Analysis to Step 3 (was Step 6)
- Move Dependency Analysis to Step 4 (was Step 7)
- Move GTM Feature Summary to Step 5 (was Step 16)
- Add stricter GTM criteria to avoid minor features
- Simplify PR data extraction to prevent timeouts
- Enhance Version Preview to suggest version based on analysis
These changes ensure critical analysis steps aren't skipped during
execution and provide clearer criteria for marketing-worthy features.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Adds Step 16 to analyze PRs for marketing-worthy features
- Extracts PR data including media assets (images, videos, GIFs)
- Claude evaluates which features would interest end users
- Generates gtm-summary-VERSION.md for sharing with marketing team
- Many releases will correctly identify no marketing features (normal for bug fixes)
This helps the GTM team identify demo opportunities without manual PR review.
