18 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	0f8e73ab05	fix(881): the replacement clause asserted an absolute I had not measured ... The previous commit replaced "the order is load-bearing" with "and that is the whole of what the order buys". What was measured is narrower: with the relevance gate moved first, the three gates are each still witnessed refusing alone. That does not establish the order buys nothing else - the reset placement is a second candidate, unmeasured either way - so the absolute is gone from both sites and what stays is the cost reason, which is readable from the control flow. refs #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 07:09:14 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	f34828806d	fix(881): the gate order I called load-bearing is a cost choice, measured ... `verify_claim`'s docstring and the record's `mechanics` both said the relevance gate must run LAST or the status and vacuity gates could never be witnessed failing alone. Executed at ff65e5e7c: moving the `reset_sandbox` + reach `verify_mutation` + `if not reach.ok:` block ahead of both earlier gates and changing nothing else, then running `pytest scripts/tests/test_mutation_harness.py -p no:randomly -k "GREEN_EXIT_STATUS or GREEN_VACUITY or GREEN_RELEVANCE or UNKNOWN_outcome"` gives 4 passed. Two of those four assert the reasons the LATER gates produce ("exited 1", "NOTHING PASSED"), so with the relevance gate first both earlier gates were still read and still witnessed refusing alone. It cannot hold, and the branch already said why one line away: the reach mutation injects a failing test, so it reddens in every fixture except the relevance one, which is what `_inert_claim_sandbox`'s own docstring states. What the order actually buys is cost - the relevance gate is the only one of the three that costs a second run of the proof - and that is what both sites now say. #881's own defect shape, inside the record that establishes the rule against it. Second, the record twice gave line-wrapping as the reason a sentence was paraphrased rather than quoted. The branch's own first `CLAIMS` entry quotes a sentence that spans a comment line break, embedding the `# ` continuation, and the harness resolves it exactly once - so a wrapped sentence is quotable by this very mechanism. The real reason at the calibration site is the replacement itself: that sentence is not in the tree any more, measured 2026-09-05 by a fixed-string search over `git ls-files`, which returns no file. At the second site the referent (`docs/defect-shapes-773.md` section 4) is present and quotable, so the causal clause is dropped and only the paraphrase marker stays. refs #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 07:06:52 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	91a9fbf81a	docs(881): name the reach mutation the way the rule field names it ... The residual paragraph called it "a stronger mutation", which is a judgement about size; what the mechanism requires is a second mutation of the same clause, declared and required to redden the proof. One vocabulary across the rule field, the manifest and the body, so a reader does not have to decide whether two descriptions are the same thing. Refs #881 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 05:18:43 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	a956cc6b8d	fix(881): the same outcome claim, restated in the proof's own docstring ... The claim the shipped GREEN entry binds — what removing the `+++ /dev/null` arm does — was written twice: in `check-doc-narrative.py`, where the entry binds it, and again in `test_a_DELETED_doc_is_not_reported_as_added_content`'s docstring, where nothing does. That is the copy-of-an-outcome shape this rule forbids, in a site class the rule names, found while reading the proof for the residual below. The docstring now points at the manifest entry and keeps its rationale (a deletion yields no `+` lines either way), which is the half the carve-out protects. The residual paragraph is also made exact rather than general. The reach mutation proves the proof depends on the clause through the `b/` stripping every scanned header goes through, not through the `/dev/null` arm itself, so in general such a green cannot separate "no test feeds that input" from "the arm changes nothing". For this entry it can, by reading the proof: the deleted-doc test deletes a tracked file, and a deletion diff under the flags `run_diff` pins carries a `+++ /dev/null` header — probed rather than reasoned. Refs #881 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 05:05:59 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	a9341d8415	fix(881): a GREEN claim is only readable if its proof REACHES the clause ... Round three found the one half of the new mechanism with no relevance gate. `verify_claim`'s GREEN path read exactly two things — the run exited 0, and something PASSED — and both are satisfied by a proof that never touches the mutated file at all. Reproduced before fixing: retargeting the shipped GREEN entry's proof from `test_check_doc_narrative.py` to `test_bom_guard_detection.py` changed nothing, and the entry still reported verified. The RED direction never had this hole, because a proof that ignores the mutation stays green and is refused as "the clause is not load-bearing". So a GREEN entry now declares a `reach_replacement` and its `reach_expect`: a SECOND mutation of the SAME clause, required to REDDEN the same proof, executed through `verify_mutation` so its red is read through the diagnostic gate rather than on exit status. The shipped entry declares `path = p` — dropping the `b/` stripping every scanned diff header goes through — and the run then scans NOTHING, which is what the declared diagnostic reads. The same retarget now fails, naming the reach verdict. The gate runs LAST of the three: run first it would refuse before the status and vacuity gates were read and neither could be witnessed failing alone (#685), and the sandbox is reset between a claim's two proof runs for the reason it is reset between mutations. It has its own disarm proof, and the two synthetic claim sandboxes are now real git repositories so `reset_sandbox` has a baseline; `_lib_with` shares the baseline registry, since a copied module's own starts empty. Also from that round: - The record no longer counts the mutation-outcome claims in the pinned proposal-3 scan. A third of the same shape sits in the same result set (`test_a_verdict_BEYOND_A_SHORT_PAGE_is_still_found`), and which side of the line a sentence falls on is a judgement, so an exact count is a figure the next reader re-derives differently — the failure this record is about. - The calibration paragraph no longer restates the post-review-verdict outcome as a dated witnessing. It points at the `CLAIMS` entry that executes it, which is the form the rewritten shell comment beside it demands. - The comment in `check-doc-narrative.py` claimed a universal ("reddens no test") while one file is executed. It now names that file, so the quote binds an outcome no wider than what is checked. - Proposal 4 from the issue is dispositioned explicitly: rejected as a rule here, on the issue's own argument that an exhortation does not fire at the moment of least slack. - `docs/README.md`'s task-signal parenthetical now names the `CLAIMS` population; the file was owned by another slot when this branch started. Cost re-measured 2026-09-05, three baseline/branch pairs: the `CLAIMS` half adds 31.7-43.6%, up from the 12.7-16.6% measured before the gate existed. The old figure is retired rather than scaled — growing the population invalidates the measurement that described it. Refs #881 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 05:02:46 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	7dba36cd58	fix(881): my own paragraph asserted the scan found no mutation-outcome claims - it found two ... Self-review of the previous commit, on the same class it fixes. "none of them asserts a mutation outcome", written about the 58 lines the proposal-3 scan returns, is false. Two do: the mutation table at `docs/decisions/records/ffmpeg/watermark-resolution-unified.md` line 104, which names a dropped discriminator and the single test that catches it, and `web/src/screens/AutoTuneScreen.test.tsx` line 174, which says what a revert to the old flex row can redden. Both read in full at `efadbec29` rather than from the truncated grep line - the truncation is how the first pass missed them. Three kinds of sentence under one pattern is a better argument than the one the false claim was making: it is not that the pattern finds only rationale, it is that it finds rationale, state anchors and mutation-outcome claims side by side and nothing in the string tells them apart. Two smaller ones in the same commit. The new test's docstring said the gate is "the one gate the others cannot cover" and the manifest said "the one PRE-FLIGHT refusal a red proof cannot be told apart from" - both assert uniqueness among the pre-flight refusals that neither measured, and a clause occurring zero times also leaves the text identical. Narrowed to what the mutant demonstrates: no later gate stands in for it. And the fixture comment glossed `verify_claim`'s GREEN refusal in quote marks, which under this record's own proposal-2 clause reads as a quotation of the library; it is not one, so the marks are gone. refs #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	99966f8bd7	fix(881): a control's purpose stated backwards, and an enumeration that grew past what it could carry ... Four review findings, all of the class this branch is about - prose asserting what a mechanism does, with nothing binding it to the mechanism. The record's `mechanics:` said a GREEN claim over an already-red proof "would otherwise be satisfied by the redness it is supposed to rule out". Inverted: `verify_claim`'s GREEN branch REFUSES any non-zero exit, so redness refutes a GREEN claim and can never satisfy one - which is what test_MUTATION_disarming_the_GREEN_EXIT_STATUS_gate_accepts_a_proof_that_WENT_RED asserts. The hazard the control removes is the same one it removes for the rows, and it runs in both directions: an already-red proof satisfies a RED claim with redness its mutation did not cause, and refuses a GREEN one for a reason unrelated to its mutation. Both the record and the fixture comment now say that, and both say what the control CANNOT do - its assertions are over the aggregate of every proof ref, so a single ref collecting nothing is invisible to it and is caught per-claim by the vacuity gate instead. The manifest's `why` had widened a scoped sentence into "THE OTHER GATES EACH CARRY THEIR OWN PROOF" and then enumerated them, which made the enumeration a completeness claim it could not meet: the identical-replacement refusal carried no proof at all. The review measured that at 8adf21eff - `if mutated == original:` disarmed, whole file 49 passed 1 skipped. That gate is the one a red proof cannot be told apart from: the mutant is byte-identical, so the proof runs against the original tree and an already-red one reddens exactly like a detection. Disarmed, the harness certifies it as "the named test went red under the declared mutation, with the declared diagnostic" - witnessed here on the real library, restored after. So the measurement above no longer holds, by construction: the gate now has a disarm proof, and the sentence says explicitly that naming the gates is not a claim the list is closed. Proposal 3's rejection quoted "16 lines" with no predicate - the defect the record's own body names three paragraphs later, where the population scan is pinned verbatim for exactly that reason. The figure is not reproducible from the text. Replaced by a pinned `git grep` over the same corpus at the same sha (`32 files, 58 lines`), with what reading all 58 shows: they are rationale, the class the rule carves out, and the few real state anchors among them are not separable by pattern, because the difference is whether the sentence explains or asserts. refs #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	9e0e11030b	docs(881): the third quotation on this branch that resolves to nothing ... `docs/defect-shapes-773.md` §4's sentence was quoted verbatim-looking but with a lowered initial capital, and the source wraps it across a line at `evidence`/`behind`, so neither the written form nor the corrected one is findable by grep. Same treatment as the `post-review-verdict.sh` one: paraphrase without quote marks, keep the section reference, say why. The section reference itself was checked - the sentence is at line 351, under `## 4. Detectors`. refs #881 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	80cd0a9ee9	docs(881): a quotation that resolves nowhere, and a paragraph contradicting the one above it ... Two more in the same class, both in prose this branch wrote. The calibration paragraph quoted `post-review-verdict.sh` as asserting "the absent-entry check catches every case on its own". That string occurs in no file: the comment wraps it across a line break at `catches`/`every`, so `git grep` for it finds exactly one hit - the record asserting it. That is ersatztv#812's second defect reproduced inside the record written to end it. Paraphrased without quote marks and pinned to lines 316-317 at `efadbec29`, which is what this record's own proposal-2 clause prescribes for a quotation that cannot be checked. The closing paragraph called the scan's hits "the remaining population" and "a backlog", three paragraphs after establishing that both figures are CANDIDATE counts and that reading them as a backlog of real claims overstates them. The closing text now says what is actually known: a place to look, with nobody having established how many are claims. refs #881 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	443df1391b	docs(881): drop a figure anchored to the branch HEAD - the anchor moves ... The sentence explaining why the scan pins a sha quoted a second figure for `HEAD`, which is exactly the anchor-to-a-moving-state shape this record settles: correct on this branch, wrong the moment anything else lands. The reason it was supporting is checkable without a number - the paragraph's own prose, the pinned command included, matches the pattern. The first draft of that replacement said "twice over". Three lines of the paragraph match, so the count is dropped rather than corrected; a count of matching lines in a paragraph nobody will re-measure is the same defect one size smaller. refs #881 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	11e4d74256	fix(881): three more claims in my own fix, and a cost band that rounded outward ... Self-review over the fix commit, on the same predicate the record states. The cost band said 13-17% over measurements spanning 12.7% to 16.6% - a band that ROUNDS is still a band the data does not support at its lower edge. It now states 12.7-16.6%, which is the span itself, with the per-pair figures beside it. The quote-scope rule was stated as an OUTCOME claim ("free to be rewritten under a green harness", "with the entry still reporting the red as verified") in the record's `rule`, in the manifest preamble and beside the entry. That is a mutation-outcome claim about the harness with no `CLAIMS` entry behind it - manufactured by the sentence that introduces the rule against it. All three now state the STRUCTURE, which is what a reader can check by looking: the assertion and the test it names are outside the binding. The manifest preamble said "three of the entries below assert that a mutation is NOT noticed". `CLAIMS` holds three entries and exactly ONE is GREEN; the three the `Claim` docstring names are CORPUS sites, not entries. Corrected to one, and "the most common shape prose actually takes" - a frequency nothing measured - dropped rather than quantified. Two claims in the new record prose were themselves overstated. The 69-line green narrowing was described as the negative direction rather than as candidates for it: sampling the hits shows `green` in this corpus is as often a CI job's colour as a mutation's outcome, so both figures are now labelled CANDIDATE counts. And the "the number moves under the commit that records it" sentence now carries the figure that shows it - the same command with `HEAD` in place of the sha prints `107 files, 344 lines`, measured on the committed tree. refs #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	3489254c8b	fix(881): re-derive the population from a PINNED scan, and bind the claim quote to the outcome it asserts ... Four review findings, every one the defect class this record is about: a prose assertion with nothing binding it to what it asserts. THE DERIVED POPULATION WAS NOT REPRODUCIBLE. "128 lines across 65 files" and "47 of the 128 carry the NEGATIVE direction" cannot be reached from the predicate the record described, while the record told the reader to re-run it there. A review swept ~40 readings of that description at efadbec29 and none returns either number. The scan is now pinned VERBATIM as the command that produced it, and the figures are what that command prints at efadbec29 on 2026-09-05: 104 files, 311 lines - candidates 39 files, 69 lines - the same command with the outcome half narrowed to `green`, i.e. the negative direction Both were re-run by extracting the fenced command from the committed file and executing it, so the text and the numbers cannot have diverged. This supersedes the 47/128 figures quoted in 05992bec7's message. CLAIMS[0]'s QUOTE BOUND THE WRONG HALF. It stopped at the comma after the mutation, leaving "so `test_a_readback_whose_statuses_array_is_NULL_is_refused` reddens" outside the binding - the words that make the sentence a claim. The harness counts occurrences of the quote alone, so the outcome could be rewritten, or the test renamed in the prose, with the entry still reporting the red as verified. The quote now spans both halves, and the scope rule is stated in the record's `rule` and in the manifest beside the entries, where the next one is written. "BOTH WERE CORRECTED IN THE SAME CHANGE" WAS FALSE. Only the shell comment was: the Python test has asserted the shape diagnostic since 5d955000f (#889), and this branch does not touch it. What this change adds beside the rewritten comment is the binding. THE COST BAND CONTRADICTED ITS OWN MEASUREMENTS. `mechanics` said 13-15% over three pairs spanning 12.7%, 16.6% and 14.4%. It now states 13-17% and the per-pair figures, since the record tells the reader to carry the percentage forward rather than the seconds. refs #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	4008f4b574	fix(881): exempt the claim binding from the index-population registry, and fix three prose claims in the change itself ... `test_mutation_harness.py` now imports the shared index derivation, which `test_every_index_derived_module_is_registered` requires be registered or exempt. It is exempt: its population is `CLAIMS`, and it consults the index only per member, to answer whether a declared `site` is a path git tracks. The exemption list's own docstring counted its entries, so that count and its review date move with it. Three claims written by this change were falsified by this change, which is the shape it exists to catch: - the binding test's docstring said membership comes from the index "not from `Path.is_file`", while the same test now asserts existence with `is_file`; - the record quoted the manifest docstring this change rewrites — an anchor to a state the commit moves, which the record itself rejects. It now anchors to `efadbec29`; - the `Claim` docstring quoted three files without naming them. They are named. refs #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:29 +02:00
timothyandClaude Fable 5.1	1fc24e8cf6	fix(881): a mutation-outcome claim is executed wherever it is written, bound to the sentence that makes it ... `testing.mutation-claims-are-executed` was the right rule scoped to its first site: `mutation_manifest.py` declared itself "one per `MUTATION`-graded row of `docs/guard-inventory.md`", so the same claim written in a code comment, a test docstring or a decision record was outside it by construction. That is where all four of ersatztv#812's consecutive review-round defects lived. Extend the rule in place rather than adding a sibling record: a sibling would recreate the exact shape (a rule per site class, with the next site class outside both) that #773, #784 and #743 each are. The subject is unchanged; only the population widens. Mechanism: `CLAIMS` in `scripts/tests/mutation_manifest.py`, keyed on the PROSE. Each entry carries the tracked `site` and the verbatim `quote`, checked every run, so a reworded sentence reports as a retarget instead of drifting from the entry that justifies it — this is proposal 2 (a quotation of another file is a claim about that file) adopted where the referent is declared. Each entry also declares RED or GREEN and is executed in the existing sandbox. GREEN is new: 47 of the 128 candidate lines the corpus grep returns at efadbec29 assert that a mutation is NOT noticed, and no `MUTATION` row can express that, so the rule was unsatisfiable for them. The green direction is read by two separate clauses (exited 0, and something actually passed) so neither can mask the other, and each carries its own disarm proof. Proposal 3 (never anchor prose to a state your own commit moves) is rejected as a DETECTOR and kept as a phrasing rule: measured 2026-09-04, the only plausible pattern set for it matched 16 lines across the scanned corpus and every one was legitimate rationale prose. The seed set falsified a shipped claim on its first run: `post-review-verdict.sh` asserted that disarming its array-TYPE read-back test left the suite green. It does not — jq refuses to iterate a `null` `.statuses` and the script dies with the parse message, reddening `test_a_readback_whose_statuses_array_is_NULL_is_refused`. Comment corrected, entry graded RED. fixes #881 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015QqCpYFsKgnAnx6jVwrKiV	2026-09-05 04:44:28 +02:00
3 people	8fd9eae0bf	fix(891): a sourced path is code, so every hook resolves it from its own tree (#903) ... Every hook under `.claude/hooks/` assigned `ETV_HOOK_FIRE_LIB` from `${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR:-<self>}` and then `. `-SOURCED it. Sourcing is execution, so a file of that name in an env-designated tree ran as code inside the hook before stdin was read and before it could decide anything. Measured on the merge gate before #858 fixed that one hook: a decoy tree's copy printed an `allow` and exited 0. Reachable without an attacker, because husky is a different launcher: `.husky/pre-push` invokes `./.claude/hooks/…` relative to the PUSHED tree, independent of the variable, so a push from one worktree while the environment names another sources the other tree's code into a gate. Sweeps the remaining twelve hooks together (population derived from `git ls-files`), reconciles the second resolution inside `scripts/hook-fire-log.sh` itself, and requires the root to OWN the sink (`-ef`, not `-e`). The static guard pins the preamble BYTE-FOR-BYTE — a withdrawal, after a lexical rule was defeated by five successive shapes. Also pins two arms of the checker that were unsubsumed AND unpinned: the begin call's presence and its missing stdout-mode token. `…_LOSES_its_instrumentation_…` looked like their proof and was not — it asserts only that the fault list is non-empty, and a stripped hook trips four arms, so deleting either left the suite green. fixes #891 refs #858, #859, #776 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UYNbVwgVszv6Pum7ZuGd75 Co-authored-by: Timothy <timothy@noreply.gitea.tblindustries.be>	2026-08-30 21:41:19 +00:00
3 people	0e40ac283b	fix(870): an empty timeline page is not exhaustion — the walk reads to its cap (#896) ... `count_pr_mutations` treated an empty page past page 1 as proof it had reached the end of the PR timeline. Gitea does not mean that: `ListIssueCommentsAndTimeline` applies the LIMIT/OFFSET in `FindComments` at the DATABASE level and filters AFTERWARDS, dropping `CommentTypeCode` rows and inaccessible cross-references into a nil slice that serializes as bare `null`. A page of 50 inline review comments is byte-identical to a page past the end while later pages still hold events, and rows are ASCENDING, so the events a fence looks for are the furthest from page 1. Fifty comments, which a PR author can create on their own PR, truncated both walks at the same place: both counts agreed, the sha comparison agreed, and an ABA force-push yielded an exemption `success` over a diff no single head justified. The walk no longer infers the end from an empty page BEFORE its cap. Such a page is skipped; the loop reads every page to its 20-page cap and trusts the counts only when the LAST page came back empty. An empty FIRST page and any unreadable shape still end the walk untrusted. NARROWED, NOT CLOSED, and the docs say so in one unit: the page-20 terminator is still trusted for the same unprovable reason, so the defeat now costs a timeline of over 1000 rows rather than ~100, with the same 50-row filtered block pinned to offsets 950..999. Measured at Gitea 1.27.1, ruling out the cheaper fixes: `X-Total-Count` on this endpoint is the post-filter length of the PAGE, not a total (`?limit=1` returns 1 on a 14-row timeline), while `/activities/feeds` returns a true total; `limit` clamps to 50; the only query params are `since`, `before`, `page`, `limit`, so the paged and serialized sets cannot be made to agree. Also: each page bounded `--connect-timeout 5 --max-time 15` and retried once, mirroring `page_statuses`, because the walk went from ~2 requests to a fixed 20 and the third call site runs after the exemption `success` is posted. Costs stated rather than hidden — worst case 40 requests and 20 sleeps, wall-clock pessimum 620s per walk, and the suite roughly doubled (202s -> 474s). Seven tests, each mutation-witnessed red; three reproduce the defeat against the shipped predecessor. Two independent cold reviews plus a re-review of the fix: no Blocker or High in the code. Their real finding was prose claiming the hole was closed, and cost arithmetic wrong twice. One reviewer claim was refuted by execution. Fixes #870 Refs: #803, #706, #664, #751, #893 Decisions-Edit: yes Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) &lt;noreply@anthropic.com&gt; Co-authored-by: Timothy <timothy@noreply.gitea.tblindustries.be>	2026-08-30 11:29:38 +00:00
timothyandtimothy	29d7a06e65	fix(806): guard populations over FILES derive from the git index, not a filesystem walk (#818) ... `testing.guard-derives-population-from-source` (#774) was silent on the commonest population in our own guards — files in a directory — and every one answered with a filesystem walk. A walk is not authoritative: it reports build output, generated shims and editor droppings, and differs per machine. #778 measured the cost by getting the same population wrong three times in one PR. CONVERTED (a completeness claim over tracked files): `test_guard_inventory.py`, `test_hook_fire_log.py`, `test_ci_image_pin_population.py` (which also gained `*.yaml`), `test_remote_state_inventory.py` (folded onto the shared derivation), and `test_pr_changed_files.py` (not on the issue's list — found by sweeping the whole repo). ASSESSED AND RECORDED, not silently skipped: `_repo_copy` takes its file list from the index for hermeticity though it makes no completeness claim; `test_ci_dropped_step_guard.py` has no filesystem population at all; the decisions corpus is recorded as unexamined rather than cleared; and the SPA page-size guard is deferred to #819 with its obstacle documented. This is not "replace every glob". `scripts/tests/tracked_files.py` is the single derivation. `test_guard_populations_derive_from_git.py` proves it in two measured complements: exhaustive removal catches a hardcoded `.exists()` admit and memoisation; the call log catches an append-only source that yields nothing on this machine — #778's shape — which removal cannot see because it has nothing to remove. Twelve rounds of independent cold review, alternating model families in isolated worktrees. The production derivations were confirmed sound every round; every blocking finding after the first was in the proofs or in prose claims about them. Counts over growing populations were removed rather than corrected, after three drifted. fixes #806 Co-authored-by: Timothy <timothy@noreply.gitea.tblindustries.be>	2026-08-22 16:07:58 +00:00
3 people	3b386649bf	feat(790): execute every MUTATION grade instead of asserting it (#815) ... Every `MUTATION` row of `docs/guard-inventory.md` now carries a DECLARED clause mutation that is applied to an isolated copy of the repository on every suite run, with the row's own named test required to go red carrying a declared diagnostic. Manifest and MUTATION rows are compared for set equality both directions; the other 22 guards each carry a stated reason, compared the same way. Measured rather than assumed: 12 of 13 guards admit a single-clause mutation; `instrumentation_faults` does not, and that entry carries the surviving finer mutation, re-run every suite. Nine cold cross-family review rounds. Rounds 1, 2, 7 and 8 each found real mechanism defects — two mutations that measured nothing, an incomplete git-environment sanitisation, a reset that restored its own mutant, and a proof of that fix which was not itself isolated. All fixed and witnessed red. fixes #790 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Co-authored-by: Timothy <timothy@noreply.gitea.tblindustries.be>	2026-08-22 13:12:15 +00:00