test: eliminate remaining stale gittensory references from test fixtures

[JSONbored]

Summary

• Finishes the test/ sweep for lingering pre-rename "gittensory" text: arbitrary example values, prose comments, and identifiers with no behavioral dependency on the real GITHUB_APP_SLUG or LOOPOVER_REVIEW_REPOS defaults.
• Purely 1:1 string swaps (1226 insertions / 1226 deletions across 212 files) — no logic changes.
• Rebased onto fix(test): rename the stale gittensory GITHUB_APP_SLUG default to loopover-orb #6900/test: remove obsolete terraform test, fix stale sentry-release assertion #6902 (which independently fixed the GITHUB_APP_SLUG default + its real dependents, and cleaned up the orphaned terraform test / sentry-release assertion) — this PR only touches the files those didn't.

Notes

• Excludes anything functionally load-bearing: real HTML PR-comment markers, the gittensory-native DB-source literal, Sentry ticket IDs, GITTENSORY_LEGACY_*_CHECK_NAME upgrade-compat constants, and the generic JSONbored/gittensory placeholder-repo pattern used elsewhere as a stand-in value.
• Three files (rag-index.test.ts, reputation-wiring.test.ts, ci-completion-fork-resume.test.ts) were caught and reverted back to "gittensory" during verification, because their renamed repo identity was actually the value matched against LOOPOVER_REVIEW_REPOS's still-current "JSONbored/gittensory,acme/widgets" allowlist default — same category of dependency fix(test): rename the stale gittensory GITHUB_APP_SLUG default to loopover-orb #6900 already handled for GITHUB_APP_SLUG.

Test plan

• npm run test:coverage (full, unsharded) — 949 files / 18084 tests passed, 0 failures, run against this exact diff post-rebase.

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.70%. Comparing base (54b784a) to head (e9d0703).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #6906   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.70%   93.70%           
=======================================
  Files         685      685           
  Lines       68292    68292           
  Branches    18718    18718           
=======================================
  Hits        63993    63993           
  Misses       3302     3302           
  Partials      997      997           

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	43.68% <ø> (ø)
shard-2	36.79% <ø> (ø)
shard-3	32.66% <ø> (ø)
shard-4	34.77% <ø> (ø)
shard-5	31.19% <ø> (ø)
shard-6	45.68% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

[loopover-orb]

Warning

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-17 17:10:15 UTC}

212 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This is a pure find-and-replace across 212 test files swapping stale `gittensory` example strings for `loopover`, with the PR description explicitly noting the three files that legitimately still need `gittensory` (because they're matched against `LOOPOVER_REVIEW_REPOS`'s allowlist default) were deliberately reverted. Spot-checking the diff hunks shown, the substitutions are consistent and mechanical (repo names, shot URLs, comment prose) with no logic changes, and CI is green across the full 949-file/18084-test suite. The one thing worth a closer look is `test/unit/visual-vision-wiring.test.ts:258` where `expect(fetchMock.mock.calls...).toEqual(["https:​//api.gittensor.io/miners"])` was left untouched — correctly, since that's a real upstream domain, not a stale rename artifact.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• This PR doesn't link to a specific open issue per the contribution policy — it reads as a cleanup/hygiene follow-up to fix(test): rename the stale gittensory GITHUB_APP_SLUG default to loopover-orb #6900/test: remove obsolete terraform test, fix stale sentry-release assertion #6902 rather than something tied to a standalone tracked issue; worth confirming there's a maintainer-authorized tracker for this sweep.
• The external secret-scan flags `test/unit/extension-auth.test.ts:21` and `:53` as generic_secret_assignment, but that file isn't part of this diff's shown hunks — worth confirming those are pre-existing test fixture placeholders and not newly introduced by this PR.
• Since this is a large mechanical rename across 212 files, consider running a final `grep -r gittensory test/` post-merge (excluding the documented exceptions) to confirm no strays were missed outside the diff's visible hunks.
• Possible secret-shaped assignment in the diff (generic_secret_assignment) — Verify the value is not a real credential.

Concerns raised — review before merging

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

Fix the following blocker(s) from this PR review:

1. No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

2. Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example `Closes #123`) before opening the PR.

Decision drivers

• ❌ Code review — 2 blockers (1 reviewer)
• ❌ Gate result — Blocking (Repo-configured hard blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 33 registered-repo PR(s), 26 merged, 341 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 33 PR(s), 341 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ Insufficient signal	risk: clean · value: insufficient-signal

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, TypeScript, Ruby, Go, JavaScript, MDX, Shell, Solidity
• Official Gittensor activity: 33 PR(s), 341 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Then work through the remaining 2 steps in the Signals table above.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by LoopOver, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run LoopOver review