Skip to content

feat(security-ui): security domain local nav as left LNB sidebar (shell parity)#945

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 2 commits into
developfrom
feat/security-layout-left-lnb
Open

feat(security-ui): security domain local nav as left LNB sidebar (shell parity)#945
seonghobae wants to merge 2 commits into
developfrom
feat/security-layout-left-lnb

Conversation

@seonghobae

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why

Canonical shell (docs/ui-ux/naruon-ui-ux-mapping.md §4.1 + mockup_06/mockup_24) = top GNB + left LOCAL LNB + work area. SecurityLayout rendered its areas (보안 대시보드/접근 권한/감사 로그/외부 공유/정책) as a horizontal top-tab strip.

What

  • Desktop (lg+): left <nav aria-label="보안 로컬 탐색"> sidebar — domain title + five areas as vertical nav buttons (aria-current active).
  • Mobile (<lg): collapses to the existing tab strip — unchanged.

Verification (local)

  • src/app/security/page.test.tsx: 3 passed; tsc + eslint clean.
  • Runtime (1440px): GNB + left LNB (보안과 관리자: 보안 대시보드/접근 권한[active]/감사 로그/외부 공유/정책) + content. ✅

Scope

Second per-domain LNB conversion (after #944 Data). Remaining: Settings / Mail / AI Hub / Projects / Tasks.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

…ebar

Same shell-parity fix as the data domain (docs/ui-ux/naruon-ui-ux-mapping.md
§4.1 + mockup_06/24): security rendered its areas (보안 대시보드/접근 권한/
감사 로그/외부 공유/정책) as a horizontal top-tab strip; the canonical shell
uses a left LOCAL LNB sidebar.

- Desktop (lg+): left <nav aria-label='보안 로컬 탐색'> sidebar with the domain
  title + the five areas as vertical nav buttons (aria-current on active).
- Mobile (<lg): collapses to the existing horizontal tab strip; unchanged.

Verified: security page tests 3 passed, tsc + eslint clean, 1440px runtime
capture shows GNB + left LNB + content.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017RkKdtHRLG4wSLh6PVsp8J
@seonghobae seonghobae enabled auto-merge July 6, 2026 23:47
@opencode-agent

opencode-agent Bot commented Jul 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OpenCode Review Overview

  • Head SHA: d843aedde5f2ee5c1ef4e437a351cda8d7578917
  • Workflow run: 29151617576
  • Workflow attempt: 1
  • Gate result: APPROVE (approval step)

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 frontend/src/components/SecurityLayout.tsx.
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 frontend/src/components/SecurityLayout.tsx 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: Playwright visual, DOM locator, ARIA snapshot, console, and responsive evidence were checked when a web UI surface was present; for non-web surfaces, API/CLI/log/docs/workflow interaction evidence was reviewed 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.

  • Result: APPROVE
  • Reason: The PR introduces a well-structured security domain local navigation sidebar (LNB) for desktop and a responsive tab strip for mobile, aligning with the canonical shell design. The changes are correctly implemented, tested, and documented.
  • Head SHA: d843aedde5f2ee5c1ef4e437a351cda8d7578917
  • Workflow run: 29151617576
  • Workflow attempt: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Frontend: SecurityLayout.tsx"]
  S1 --> I1["browser runtime and bundle"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Frontend: SecurityLayout.tsx"]
  R1 --> V1["frontend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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 frontend/src/components/SecurityLayout.tsx.
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 frontend/src/components/SecurityLayout.tsx 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: Playwright visual, DOM locator, ARIA snapshot, console, and responsive evidence were checked when a web UI surface was present; for non-web surfaces, API/CLI/log/docs/workflow interaction evidence was reviewed 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.

  • Result: APPROVE
  • Reason: The PR introduces a well-structured security domain local navigation sidebar (LNB) for desktop and a responsive tab strip for mobile, aligning with the canonical shell design. The changes are correctly implemented, tested, and documented.
  • Head SHA: d843aedde5f2ee5c1ef4e437a351cda8d7578917
  • Workflow run: 29151617576
  • Workflow attempt: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Frontend: SecurityLayout.tsx"]
  S1 --> I1["browser runtime and bundle"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Frontend: SecurityLayout.tsx"]
  R1 --> V1["frontend tests"]
Loading

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.

1 participant