extend conformance matrix with read_file cases

[avinxshKD]

Extends protocol conformance coverage beyond parser/API-only checks by adding read_file runtime-behavior cases to the phase-1 fixtures and phase-2 cross-runtime matrix.

Kept this report-only and minimal so we improve coverage signal without changing runtime behavior or CI gating.

closes #527

[avinxshKD]

@pradeeban @Rahuljagwani @mayureshkothare Pls take a look, kept this minimal and report only

[avinxshKD]

Also a clarification question, Now that prototypes are public, If applicants update their prototypes after seeing others’ work, or make late edits, How is that considered in evaluation? I’m asking to better understand the expected process and fairness.

[pradeeban]

Good question.
I also see those who made last minute submissions are opening up GitHub discussions [1] as an afterthought. While it is perfectly fine in an open-source sense, it violates the expectations of fairness on GSoC.

To answer your question briefly, it won't influence.
To elaborate:
If a mentor asks for clarification, yes, you should address it. Some applicants disappear after submitting their proposal. That weighs badly on them. Other than that, usually time freezes at the application deadline and we do not (and should not) consider later updates (unless something explicitly requested/initiated by the mentor or a continuation of something that started prior to application - such as an open PR getting merged eventually).

Some organizations are new. Some mentors (or org admins) are new. So they may not follow these principles correctly. But as org-admin, I keep a look on these and how our mentors are evaluating their proposals (since many of them were not very super-active during the application phase).

[1] KathiraveluLab/DREAMS#145