PrimeIntellect/SWE-rebench-V2 huggingface dataset:
Repository: jmrozanec/cron-utils (java)

Issue:
Cron is invalid?
Cron-utils says '0 0 12-0 ? * 3' is a valid cron when I use version 8.1.1.But when I updated to 9.0.1,'0 0 12-0 ? * 3' became invalid.

Pull request:
Quartz cron expressions should allow overflowing ranges
Quartz cron expressions should allow overflowing ranges.

Fixes #396 

Patch:
diff --git a/src/main/java/com/cronutils/model/definition/CronDefinitionBuilder.java b/src/main/java/com/cronutils/model/definition/CronDefinitionBuilder.java
index 1f047e1..f78b0c0 100755
--- a/src/main/java/com/cronutils/model/definition/CronDefinitionBuilder.java
+++ b/src/main/java/com/cronutils/model/definition/CronDefinitionBuilder.java
@@ -258,10 +258,10 @@ public class CronDefinitionBuilder {
      */
     private static CronDefinition quartz() {
         return CronDefinitionBuilder.defineCron()
-                .withSeconds().withStrictRange().and()
-                .withMinutes().withStrictRange().and()
-                .withHours().withStrictRange().and()
-                .withDayOfMonth().withValidRange(1, 32).supportsL().supportsW().supportsLW().supportsQuestionMark().withStrictRange().and()
+                .withSeconds().and()
+                .withMinutes().and()
+                .withHours().and()
+                .withDayOfMonth().withValidRange(1, 32).supportsL().supportsW().supportsLW().supportsQuestionMark().and()
                 .withMonth().withValidRange(1, 13).and()
                 .withDayOfWeek().withValidRange(1, 7).withMondayDoWValue(2).supportsHash().supportsL().supportsQuestionMark().and()
                 .withYear().withValidRange(1970, 2099).withStrictRange().optional().and()


Test patch:
diff --git a/src/test/java/com/cronutils/validator/CronValidatorQuartzIntegrationTest.java b/src/test/java/com/cronutils/validator/CronValidatorQuartzIntegrationTest.java
index fab93f4..2aa539d 100755
--- a/src/test/java/com/cronutils/validator/CronValidatorQuartzIntegrationTest.java
+++ b/src/test/java/com/cronutils/validator/CronValidatorQuartzIntegrationTest.java
@@ -85,4 +85,19 @@ public class CronValidatorQuartzIntegrationTest {
         parser.parse("0 0 12 ? * FRI-SAT");
         parser.parse("0 0 12 ? * SAT-SUN");
     }
+
+    /**
+     * Issue #396: overflow ranges
+     * Quartz cron expressions should support overflowing ranges
+     * See https://github.com/quartz-scheduler/quartz/blob/master/quartz-core/src/main/java/org/quartz/CronExpression.java
+     */
+    @Test
+    public void testOverflowRange() {
+        parser.parse("20-10 0 0 ? * 3"); // second overflow
+        parser.parse("0 40-20 0 ? * 3"); // minute overflow
+        parser.parse("0 0 12-2 ? * 3"); // hour overflow
+        parser.parse("0 0 0 24-7 * ?"); // day of month overflow
+        parser.parse("0 0 0 ? 10-3 3"); // month overflow
+        parser.parse("0 0 0 ? * 5-1"); // day of week overflow
+    }
 }
Repository: palantir/policy-bot (go)

Issue:
Increase max nesting depth
I was wondering if it would be possible to increase the max nesting depth of ors/ands to 6-7? I have a complex use case that requires just a little bit more nesting than is currently supported :)

Pull request:
Increase max rule nesting depth to 10
Fixes #168.

Patch:
diff --git a/policy/approval/parse.go b/policy/approval/parse.go
index b13a2ce..a7b8f46 100644
--- a/policy/approval/parse.go
+++ b/policy/approval/parse.go
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ func (p Policy) Parse(rules map[string]*Rule) (common.Evaluator, error) {
 }
 
 func parsePolicyR(policy interface{}, rules map[string]*Rule, depth int) (common.Evaluator, error) {
-	if depth > 5 {
+	if depth > 10 {
 		return nil, errors.New("reached maximum recursive depth while processing policy")
 	}
 


Test patch:
diff --git a/policy/approval/parse_test.go b/policy/approval/parse_test.go
index 86a162d..ce33147 100644
--- a/policy/approval/parse_test.go
+++ b/policy/approval/parse_test.go
@@ -192,13 +192,18 @@ func TestParsePolicyError_multikey(t *testing.T) {
 }
 
 func TestParsePolicyError_recursiveDepth(t *testing.T) {
-	// Recursive depth 5 is allowed
+	// Recursive depth 10 is allowed
 	policy := `
 - or:
-   - or:
+  - or:
+    - or:
       - or:
-         - or:
-            - rule1
+        - or:
+          - or:
+            - or:
+              - or:
+                - or:
+                  - rule1
 `
 
 	rules := `
@@ -208,14 +213,19 @@ func TestParsePolicyError_recursiveDepth(t *testing.T) {
 	_, err := loadAndParsePolicy(t, policy, rules)
 	require.NoError(t, err)
 
-	// Recursive depth 6 is not allowed
+	// Recursive depth 11 is not allowed
 	policy = `
 - or:
-   - or:
+  - or:
+    - or:
       - or:
-         - or:
+        - or:
+          - or:
             - or:
-               - rule1
+              - or:
+                - or:
+                  - or:
+                    - rule1
 `
 
 	_, err = loadAndParsePolicy(t, policy, rules)