hoogvliets puts a test harness around the disclosure

A downstream fork lands the safety net first - backend tests and CI before the source changes they cover.

infrastructurecompliance

Most disclosures show up as a wall of code. hoogvliets is doing the opposite: carving out the test coverage into its own reviewable slice so reviewers can judge the safety net before wading through what it catches.

The scope is wide. Auth hardening checks cross-tenant access and shared-user scenarios. Document round-trips cover the awkward parts of Word files - tables, bullets, Unicode, smart quotes, nonbreaking spaces. Streaming tests pin down how citations, reasoning, and tool calls flow back to the user. Integration suites reach into audit logs, account deletion and restore, document version concurrency, uploads, and built-in workflows. A CI workflow runs the document suite automatically. hoogvliets is upfront that some tests lean on source changes disclosed elsewhere and won't all pass against upstream in isolation - a deliberate trade for reviewability.

So what Anyone evaluating a Mike fork for production use should watch this pattern - a fork that ships its own test discipline is one you can actually audit.

View this fork on GitHub →

Spotted something wrong? Or know the PR text has fresher detail than the writeup above?