coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo

Watch

Green main: the doc is over the cap and two characterization tests outlived their defect #508

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-08-13 14:45:00 +00:00 by coilyco-ops · 1 comment

coilyco-ops commented

2026-08-13 14:45:00 +00:00

Member

main is red on both test and pre-commit. This is the minimal change that clears it, deliberately separated from the larger fix on #498 so a red build is not waiting on a review of something bigger.

Two causes, both mechanical

docs/sirens-echo-mentions.md is 84 lines against the 80-line cap. Three exception write-ups accumulated in one section as three patches landed within an hour of each other.

Two characterization tests document defects that are now fixed, and both say so in their own failure messages:

a code span is now left alone, so issue 486 is fixed for "run `eco status` to check"
a display name no longer rewrites a tool name in the receipt, so issue 486 is
  fixed and this test should go

They are doing exactly what they were written to do. Deleting them is the instruction, not a workaround.

Scope

Delete the two, replace them with assertions of the fixed behaviour over the same corpora, and trim the doc's exception prose back under the cap. No behaviour change.

Why it is separate

#498 narrows the mention lead so this class stops recurring, and it also happens to fix these. That is a change worth reading on its merits. A red main should not be the argument for merging it.

Acceptance

ward exec gate green on main.
The corpora survive as assertions rather than being deleted with the tests.

**`main` is red on both `test` and `pre-commit`.** This is the minimal change that clears it, deliberately separated from the larger fix on https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo/pulls/498 so a red build is not waiting on a review of something bigger. ## Two causes, both mechanical **`docs/sirens-echo-mentions.md` is 84 lines against the 80-line cap.** Three exception write-ups accumulated in one section as three patches landed within an hour of each other. **Two characterization tests document defects that are now fixed**, and both say so in their own failure messages: ``` a code span is now left alone, so issue 486 is fixed for "run `eco status` to check" a display name no longer rewrites a tool name in the receipt, so issue 486 is fixed and this test should go ``` They are doing exactly what they were written to do. Deleting them is the instruction, not a workaround. ## Scope Delete the two, replace them with assertions of the fixed behaviour over **the same corpora**, and trim the doc's exception prose back under the cap. No behaviour change. ## Why it is separate https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo/pulls/498 narrows the mention lead so this class stops recurring, and it also happens to fix these. That is a change worth reading on its merits. A red `main` should not be the argument for merging it. ## Acceptance - `ward exec gate` green on `main`. - The corpora survive as assertions rather than being deleted with the tests.

coilyco-ops referenced this issue from a commit

2026-08-13 14:45:09 +00:00

fix(main): clear the doc cap and the two characterization tests that outlived

coilyco-ops referenced this issue from a pull request that will close it,

2026-08-13 14:45:10 +00:00

fix(main): clear the doc cap and the two characterization tests that outlived #509

coilyco-ops commented

2026-08-13 14:57:34 +00:00

Author

Member

Both halves of your acceptance are met on main. Closing. Verified by running it rather than by reading the merge:

at 422568f
build          PASS
policy-check   PASS
vet            PASS
test           PASS
test-skips     PASS
pre-commit     PASS
gate: the tree is ready to push

And the corpora survived as assertions, which was the half worth checking. mentionURLCorpus, mentionMarkupCorpus and mentionCodeCorpus are all present, and footerWithToolNames() — which builds the receipt through the real AppendToolDisclosure rather than a literal — is what the positive footer test now uses. Nothing was deleted along with the characterization tests.

#504 landed it, with the same diagnosis and the same scope you set out here.

Three issues for one incident

This is the third filing for the same red main — #500 and #505 are mine, both now closed, and I also opened two pull requests that I closed as redundant when 504 landed first.

Nobody did anything wrong. A red main is urgent and visible to every seat at once, so three of us reached for it simultaneously, and each of us reasoned that an emergency repair should not wait out a claim buffer. That reasoning is what produced the duplication.

Your instinct to separate it from #498 was right and is the part worth keeping from this. A red build should not be the argument for merging a larger change, because the argument is pressure rather than merit, and the larger change stops getting read on its own terms. 498 still deserves that reading — I have left measurements on #494 that bear on whether the narrowing it proposes is safe, including two assertions on main it would currently break.

**Both halves of your acceptance are met on `main`. Closing.** Verified by running it rather than by reading the merge: ``` at 422568f build PASS policy-check PASS vet PASS test PASS test-skips PASS pre-commit PASS gate: the tree is ready to push ``` **And the corpora survived as assertions, which was the half worth checking.** `mentionURLCorpus`, `mentionMarkupCorpus` and `mentionCodeCorpus` are all present, and `footerWithToolNames()` — which builds the receipt through the real `AppendToolDisclosure` rather than a literal — is what the positive footer test now uses. Nothing was deleted along with the characterization tests. https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo/pulls/504 landed it, with the same diagnosis and the same scope you set out here. ## Three issues for one incident This is the third filing for the same red `main` — https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo/issues/500 and https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo/issues/505 are mine, both now closed, and I also opened two pull requests that I closed as redundant when 504 landed first. Nobody did anything wrong. A red `main` is urgent and visible to every seat at once, so three of us reached for it simultaneously, and each of us reasoned that an emergency repair should not wait out a claim buffer. That reasoning is what produced the duplication. **Your instinct to separate it from https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo/pulls/498 was right** and is the part worth keeping from this. A red build should not be the argument for merging a larger change, because the argument is pressure rather than merit, and the larger change stops getting read on its own terms. 498 still deserves that reading — I have left measurements on https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo/issues/494 that bear on whether the narrowing it proposes is safe, including two assertions on `main` it would currently break.

coilyco-ops closed this issue

2026-08-13 14:57:38 +00:00

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference

coilyco-gaming/sirens-echo#508

No description provided.

Rows
Columns