What the Data for This Category Looks Like
The data for this category primarily originates from Git repositories, CI pipelines, static scanning reports, and defect databases. Update frequency is daily or per commit. Daily generated documents include merge requests, code review comments, commit records, and branch strategy descriptions. Core fields include merge request unique identifiers, reviewer lists, changed file lists, associated defect IDs, and commit timestamps. The data structure primarily consists of structured associated records. Different documents are linked via merge request IDs. Overall content updates in real time alongside code commits and review actions.
How These Characteristics Impose Constraints on Sharing and Embedding
Since data sources are tied to the permission system of Git repositories, the sharing and embedding workflow must verify team repository access permissions through a third-party permission system. This prevents unauthorized users from viewing private merge request content. The high-frequency update feature of the data means the cache duration for shared content should not be overly long. This avoids displaying outdated review comments or commit records. Structured associated data requires that embedding must link target content via a business unique identifier. Combine this with the system-generated shareId to identify the sharing entry. Generalized access to unassociated review data is not supported. For internal ticket Q&A scenarios, embedded content must only display public information that meets permission requirements. Sensitive change details from incomplete reviews must not be exposed.
Configuration Settings
These configurations are based on FastGPT v4.17.0.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Sharing entry shareId | Copy the full sharing link generated by the system; do not manually replace the identifier | Identifies the sharing entry; business records and data permissions for code review and merge management must still be handled by external systems |
| Sharing link validity period | Test starting point: 7 days; adjust based on actual testing of code review and merge management collaboration cycles and revocation requirements | Verify availability within the valid period and access behavior after expiration; this value is not an official default or industry statistic |
| QPM | Test starting point: 20 requests per user per minute; adjust based on actual load | Limits access frequency for a single user; validation requires combining request logs and actual load |
| Identity verification | When identity permission requirements exist, first verify commercial edition capabilities and the uid returned by the third-party identity service | Holding a sharing link does not equate to having business data permissions; third-party identity and data scope must be verified separately |
| Referenced content display | Select display configurations for reference fragments, full text, and original text based on the sensitivity of code review and merge management materials | Check displayed content within authorized data ranges; hidden interfaces cannot replace data permission controls |
| Conversation record verification | Test example: Prepare 10 code review and merge management Q&A samples; check each on the same browser and another device | Anonymous records rely on browser local identity; retention cannot be guaranteed across devices or after cache clearance |
Three Common Misconfiguration Issues
- Sharing entries related to code review and merge management fail to open. The full system-generated link and its validity period are first verified, followed by checking browser request statuses. Manual replacement of
shareIdis not permitted. - The visible scope of code review and merge management data does not match expectations. Third-party identity verification results, workflow request parameters, and external system data permissions are verified separately. The sharing entry identifier itself does not provide business authorization.
- The same code review and merge management Q&A is not visible on another device. For anonymous scenarios, device, browser, and local identity status are first checked. Retention cannot be guaranteed across devices or after cache clearance. This phenomenon alone cannot be used to judge service anomalies.
How to Confirm Successful Configuration
- The generated sharing link is visited to verify that only public information for the specified merge request is displayed, with no undisclosed change details.
- A new commit is triggered for the corresponding merge request. After waiting for cache refresh, the embedded page is refreshed. Confirm that page content has been updated synchronously.
- An account without access permissions for the target Git repository is used on the embedded page to verify that content fails to load or a permission denied prompt is displayed.
- The
shareIdused in the embedded code is checked to confirm it is the system-generated value from Application Details - Release Channels - Guest Access Window.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-10-19.