Commit Graph
1664 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Claude e63b03a0ee docs: лёгкий трек становится путём по умолчанию
Прежде полный трек был бесплатен, а выбор лёгкого требовал обоснования. Цена —
2.9 ревью-документа на задачу и до шести на одну issue (#329, #316, #290), при
том что Medium-находки всё равно чинятся в той же задаче без отдельного цикла.

Порог не изменился: критерии §5 те же и обязательны все одновременно. Изменилась
сторона доказательства — в S2-analysis называется критерий, который задача НЕ
проходит, если идёт полным треком. «Обычный трек» без названного критерия
обоснованием не является.

Правка идёт и в AGENTS.md: там трек описан как «shortcut для мелкой работы», а
это ровно та формулировка, из-за которой полный трек остаётся умолчанием на
практике. AGENTS.md стоит вторым в порядке доверия, поэтому без него правка
канона поведение не меняет.

Бюджет четырёх циклов, арбитраж владельца, обязательность ТЗ на полном треке и
правило «ревью до мержа» не тронуты.

Issue: #338
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 02:08:14 +03:00
Claude 2b1964f973 ci: бандл собирается один раз, четыре лёгкие джобы стали одной
Бандл собирался пятью job независимо: три шарда смоков, golden, перф-смок —
каждая гоняла `bundle:sync`, то есть `tsc --noEmit` плюс rollup. Теперь его
собирает `frontend` и выкладывает артефактом, остальные скачивают и раскладывают
`bundle-sync.mjs`. Подмену артефакта отдельной проверкой ловить не нужно:
assertFreshDemoBundle сверяет вшитый в бандл отпечаток с sourceFingerprint
выкачанного дерева, и каждая браузерная job делает это перед первым кадром.

`npm ci` остаётся во всех: браузерным job нужен playwright из node_modules, а не
только бандл. Артефакт node_modules был бы медленнее `npm ci` с тёплым кэшем.

docs, process-workflow-sync, provenance и process-gate стали шагами одной job
`preflight`. Независимость сохранена намеренно: у каждого шага
continue-on-error, вердикт в конце падает и перечисляет всё упавшее сразу.
Прежняя запись «краснеет сам и не роняет остальные» продолжает действовать — на
уровне шагов, с той же гранулярностью в логе.

hacs и hassfest не тронуты: предложение сузить их до dev и тегов уже выполнено
классификатором `changes` — на ветках задач они и так идут только при правке
манифестов, а на dev фильтров нет намеренно (гейт беты требует, чтобы «зелёный
Validate» значил одно и то же).

test/validate-workflow.test.mjs закрепляет то, что в диффе строк не видно:
висячая зависимость `needs` не роняет YAML, а молча пропускает job навсегда.
Три мутанта проверены руками — висячая зависимость, вернувшаяся вторая сборка,
шаг без continue-on-error, — каждый убит.

Issue: #336
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 02:04:40 +03:00
Claude 4800c44e51 test: локальная съёмка golden допустима по доказательству, а не по доверию
Прежде эталон принимался только из артефакта CI: растеризация шрифтов на другой
машине может отличаться, а доказать обратное было нечем. Цена — два полных
прогона на каждый визуальный фикс, при версии матрицы 48 она платится часто.

Доказательство теперь эмпирическое: среда равна раннеру, если каждая сцена,
которую менять не собирались, совпала со своим эталоном. Расхождение
растеризации спрятать нельзя — оно задевает все сцены с текстом. Ревьюер
объявляет намерение через --expect-change, всё разошедшееся помимо списка
приёмку запрещает. Поэтому неверно угаданный тег образа не может испортить
эталоны: он может только не сработать.

То же правило независимо от среды запрещает «принять всё, чтобы CI позеленел» —
именно так эталон перестаёт быть эталоном, молча и одной командой.

scripts/golden-container.mjs снимает кандидатов в образе Playwright той же
версии, что залочена в package-lock. Хозяйский node_modules прячется анонимным
томом: он собран под Windows, и npm ci внутри контейнера сломал бы дерево.

Обёртка, а не правка demo/golden/accept.mjs, — намеренно. sourceFingerprint
включает ВСЕ .mjs из demo/golden, включая accept.mjs и policy.mjs, которые
исполняются после съёмки и ни одного пикселя изменить не могут. Их правка
объявляет устаревшими бандл и оба манифеста, то есть требует ровно того двойного
цикла, который эта задача убирает. Сужение корпуса отпечатка — отдельная задача:
сам source-fingerprint.mjs в корпусе, и одна пересборка бандла неизбежна.

Issue: #334
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 01:59:45 +03:00
Codex 2c20f2dc35 perf: mutation-gate builds the bundle only for browser guards, compiles incrementally, shards and diffs (#332)
Four independent cuts into the 2-4 hour full run, none touching the contract
"a mutant must turn its guard red":

- guardNeedsBundle: rollup runs only for guards that open the built bundle
  (demo/ smokes, golden captures, bundle:sync) — 68 of 253 registry entries.
  Unit and backend guards never read dist/ as a build artifact (verified
  against every test that mentions dist/**: they read the git checkout or
  synthetic files), so 185 mutants skip the most expensive step entirely.
- seedTestBuild + incremental tsc: the mutant worktree starts from the main
  tree's warm test-build/ and .tsbuildinfo; tsc compares file hashes, not
  mtimes, so the fresh checkout stays warm and only the mutated delta is
  recompiled. This also speeds up the long guards that run tsc themselves.
- --changed[=range]: run only mutants whose patch files are touched by the
  diff (origin/dev..HEAD by default). An empty selection is an honest success
  with an explicit message — the full registry remains the pre-release
  contract, per the workflow comment.
- --shard=i/n: deterministic interleaved slices; the workflow runs a 4-way
  matrix, and a warm test-build step feeds every shard. Interleaving spreads
  the expensive browser mutants across shards instead of clumping them.

Measured per mutant on this machine: unit 12-13 s (was ~50-70 s), backend
6 s, browser 32 s (unchanged — the bundle is genuinely needed there). Full
run estimate drops to ~70 sequential minutes, ~20 on four shards.

Unit coverage: guard classification on real registry shapes, a floor on both
classes so the split cannot silently collapse, changed-selection semantics,
and shard completeness/disjointness with an anti-clumping bound.

Issue: #332
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 01:33:36 +03:00
claude[bot] 2c4b505f1a docs: review document for #329
Проверка (CI) / Процесс: process.yml идентичен в main и dev (push) Successful in 2m48s
Проверка (CI) / Провенанс коммитов: трейлеры и эталоны (push) Successful in 2m31s
Проверка (CI) / Процессный гейт: диапазон, трейлеры, статусы issue (push) Successful in 2m30s
Проверка (CI) / Классификация изменённых файлов (push) Successful in 36s
Проверка (CI) / HACS: валидация репозитория (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Hassfest: манифест интеграции (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Фронтенд: типы, юниты, мутанты, синхрон бандла (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Переиспользование: это дерево уже проверено (push) Successful in 38s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 1 из 3) (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 2 из 3) (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 3 из 3) (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Смоки: все шарды зелёные (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Golden-кадры против принятых эталонов (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Перф-смок: бюджет времени кадра (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Бэкенд: pytest в Home Assistant (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Документация: гайды, ченджлоги, скриншот-индекс (push) Failing after 47s
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 21:49:59 +00:00
Codex 273b0d5ecb test: the backend mutant follows the registry convention (#329 r2-H1)
The reviewer is right twice over. My previous commit fixed the red CI by
relaxing the contract — a guard could name a `.py` file — when the registry
already had a convention for exactly this case: every backend mutant runs
`node scripts/backend-test-guard.mjs <pattern> <file>`, which owns the python
executable choice and the `-k` selection. Bending a rule to fit my one-off is
the worse of the two possible fixes, so the contract goes back to demanding a
`.mjs` guard, and junction-limit-backend-raw-baseline now uses the helper and
targets the one test that proves the migration
(test_legacy_baseline_is_judged_after_the_same_migration).

Re-verified: registry --check clean, the mutant still catches its regression
1/1, npm test 1390 passed / 0 failed.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 00:41:30 +03:00
claude[bot] f2c2084dd4 docs: review document for #329
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 21:37:28 +00:00
Codex 26c6e87079 test: a mutant guard may be pytest, not only node (#329)
The registry contract demanded that every guard name a `.mjs` file, which was
true until this task added the first backend mutant —
junction-limit-backend-raw-baseline is guarded by pytest, and the mutation-gate
job already installs it. My mistake: I ran `--check` and the single mutant
after adding it, but not the unit suite that owns the registry contract, so CI
caught what I should have.

The contract keeps its point: a guard must name a file that exists.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 00:28:12 +03:00
Codex 0824e51014 test: prove AC10 — Optimize adds no junction violation (#329 M4)
AC10 was asserted, never shown. Optimize runs alignAllToGrid and
repairNearAxisRoomWalls, which move nodes by fractions of a centimetre, and
none of П1-П5 carries a margin wider than the grid step in general — so
"obviously true by construction" was not available.

Two units, both counting violations the way the write barrier does (each side
through commitWallSegmentModel first):
- the owner's fixture in legacy storage — the inherited apex is there before
  Optimize, and no rule's count grows after;
- the П4 boundary — two rooms exactly 5 cm apart, where snapping could have
  pulled a node under the limit, stay clean.

The first test asserts the baseline actually carries a violation, so it cannot
pass by measuring an empty plan; violationsByRule fails loudly if the space or
its catalogue goes missing, for the same reason. Spec revision 7 records the
proof and the other three review answers.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 00:24:34 +03:00
Codex 574fea98ab docs: one limits section, and Resize does raise a toast (#329 M2, M3)
The Russian guide carried the junction-limits section twice, word for word.
And both guides described Resize as silently stopping, in contrast to a toast
from drawing and Thickness — it stops AND names the rule once per gesture
(resize.limit_stopped, pinned by the smoke). Wording follows the code.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 00:24:34 +03:00
Codex 8f0b6b97e8 refactor: drop the chamfer helpers the honest apex made dead (#329 M1)
002795f7 said "the clip helper and its cap plumbing are gone" while leaving
clipPolygonOutsideCap(), degenerateApexCaps() and the apexCaps ring field in
place — exported, uncalled and untested. They belong to the flat chamfer the
owner rejected; the apex now ends in one point on both faces, so the quads
have no caller and no meaning.

The orphaned JSDoc block that described degenerateApexCaps went with them, and
the wallBodiesGeometry documentation this change had earlier separated from
its function is reattached: the #329 constant and predicate now sit above it.

Golden verify stays green on the whole matrix, which is the evidence the
removed code was indeed dead.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 00:24:34 +03:00
Codex 0bb42caeff fix: the backend judges both sides after the same migration (#329 H1)
The limits read `wall_segments`, so a document older than the catalogue
reports no walls at all — and therefore no violations, whatever its geometry.
Comparing that raw baseline against a candidate the card had already migrated
counted every inherited violation as new, and a legacy plan could not take an
unrelated edit at all: renaming a room was refused with junction_limit_angle.
Spec §3 forbids exactly this, and the frontend had already learned the same
lesson in 4758767e; the backend mirror simply never got the second half.

validate_junction_limits now runs both documents through
commit_wall_segment_model before counting. A document that cannot be migrated
is not this validator's verdict — the wall-model barrier owns that error and
reports it with its own code — so it degrades to "no baseline to inherit".

The regression is pinned twice: a test that asserts the legacy baseline reads
clean raw and carries the apex once migrated, and the mutant
junction-limit-backend-raw-baseline. Both fixtures that exercise the barrier
were rebuilt as real documents (rooms plus walls), because the previous ones
put walls in wall_segments with no rooms and did not survive migration.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-28 00:23:54 +03:00
claude[bot] e1df015d93 docs: review document for #329
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 21:01:48 +00:00
Codex 7017896eb2 docs: refresh screenshot source fingerprint after the rebase (#329)
The branch was rebased onto the extracted resize controller (#264), which
changes the source fingerprint the documentation screenshots are pinned to.
The images themselves are byte-identical — only the recorded fingerprint moves.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:36:20 +03:00
Codex ad3f998147 test: golden baseline for the legacy sharp apex (#329)
Reviewed the candidate produced by the Linux CI job of run 33106626544 on
issue/329-junction-limits, where golden failed with exactly one line —
"missing-baseline sharp-apex-legacy-dark" — and accepted only that image. The
nine unrelated baselines whose bytes drifted in the same artifact were
restored to their reviewed versions, so this commit changes one picture.

Baseline-Reviewed: run 33106626544, job 98638432113 (Golden-кадры против принятых эталонов)
Release: v1.68.2
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:32:07 +03:00
Codex 8945e04fe4 feat: backend mirror of the junction limits (#329 §5, AC9)
custom_components/houseplan/junction_limits.py repeats П1-П4 for the write
barrier in websocket_api, counting per rule so an inherited violation still
round-trips, and raises JunctionLimitError with the stable code
junction_limit_<rule>.

П5 is deliberately not mirrored — it judges the rendered wall bodies, and a
second mitre/inset pipeline in Python would drift more dangerously than the
rule it guards. Optimize stays outside the check for the same reason migration
and import do: it repairs existing geometry.

test_parity_with_the_frontend_checks feeds identical fixtures to the TS
functions and to this module and demands the same verdict, so the two
implementations cannot silently diverge.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:32:07 +03:00
Codex 7a74a37c6e test: golden scene for the legacy sharp apex (#329 AC6)
The owner's spike room (≈9.9°, 15 cm walls) is extracted into
test/fixtures/329-sharp-apex.json and rendered on its own so a returning
trident, a flat chamfer or a jagged edge fails the pixel gate. Baseline
follows from the CI candidate, as the process requires.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:32:07 +03:00
Codex 2b1f03be2d test: the Resize channel of the junction limits, driven by a real pointer (#329 AC7a)
Measured what Resize itself already forbids: a room cannot be squeezed below
30 cm (two 15 cm walls), so П3 and П5 are unreachable through shrinking and
the gate merely fails closed there. П4 IS reachable on a fine grid, so the
smoke drags a real handle on a 2 cm grid: two rooms 10 cm apart, a 6 cm pull
would leave 4 cm between foreign nodes, the wall stops at 6 cm and exactly one
toast names the 5 cm rule.

Spec revision 6 records both the measurement and the two corrections it forces
on AC7a: a dimmed handle cannot express a per-step limit, and the plan is NOT
byte-unchanged — the allowed part of the gesture is a legitimate edit.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:31:42 +03:00
Codex f514fb27fe feat: junction limits refuse the write in every editing surface (#329)
П3 measures the WALL, not the catalogue atom: a short filler segment that
compensates a thickness step (owner's fixture, 5 cm = (30-20)/2) is a legal
continuation of a long same-thickness wall, so the rule walks the maximal
collinear run through the shared nodes before judging the length.

Resize stops at the last allowed position and names the broken rule instead
of the generic "geometry cannot be saved"; the Thickness dialog refuses
through its own toast. Both channels are pinned by demo/smoke_junction_limits
plus three mutants (angle threshold, write barrier, degenerate apex bevel).

Issue: #329
User-Visible: yes
2026-08-27 23:31:42 +03:00
Codex 7d15bd06e9 test: island rooms respect the 20 cm segment limit (#329 П3)
Owner decision (chat, 2026-08-27): keep П3 and fix the smoke. A 10 cm island
room is a column, and columns have their own tool (wall_columns) — that was
the reasoning behind the limit in the first place. The island of the smoke is
now 25 cm, and a new case pins the contract: a 10 cm island is refused.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:31:17 +03:00
Codex 002795f7c8 fix: no jags on the edges of a degenerate apex (#329 §4)
Owner report: small serrations remained on the outer edges between the inner
and the outer vertex. Measured on the fixture ring: two ~4 cm steps plus four
micro-vertices at the tip. Their source was the inset contour's two-point
bevel folding into a bow-tie, and the earlier half-plane clip of that fold,
which left a 0.2 cm sliver the boolean union turned into steps. The inset now
ends in ITS own mitre point at a degenerate apex — mirroring the sharp outer
tip — so there is no fold to clip and no sliver to smear: the room ring is
exactly three vertices, every side longer than the half depth. The clip
helper and its cap plumbing are gone. The user-visible wording of this work
already stands in both changelogs from the #329 entry.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:31:17 +03:00
Codex 4758767e0c fix: junction limits judge both sides after the same migration (#329)
The baseline for inheritance was the raw previous document, which for a
legacy space carries no wall catalogue at all — so every inherited short
segment of a real plan looked new and the resize smoke's legitimate write was
refused (executed: two 5 cm segments against their own 30 cm thickness).
Both sides now cross commitWallSegmentModel first, and inheritance is counted
per rule rather than per subject, because a structural write re-keys the
carriers it re-atomises.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:30:52 +03:00
Codex 214355f424 fix: a degenerate sharp corner renders as a normal sharp apex (#329 §4)
Owner correction (chat, 2026-08-27): no flat chamfer at the tip — a plain
sharp apex. Proven by execution on the issue fixture: the outset contour fell
back to a two-point bevel (the 4·h mitre limit against an 87 cm reach) while
the inset contour folded into a bow-tie, and subtracting that fold carved the
V-notches — together they made the trident. Now a degenerate corner (below 15
degrees, inner faces meeting inside both walls) contributes ONE outset point
at the plan's own vertex — no bevel, no metres-long mitre needle — and its
inset is clipped at the convergence line so no fold is subtracted. Plain and
merely sharp pairs keep the full mitre of #310. The write-side limits of
П1-П5 stop new plans from creating such corners at all.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: yes
2026-08-27 23:30:26 +03:00
Codex 6fc57f2ae8 feat: pure wall-junction limit checks (#329 П1-П5)
The owner's five limits as pure functions: minimum 15 degrees between
neighbouring rays of a node (a straight wall through the node is a 180 pair,
not a violation), at most 6 walls per node, a segment at least
max(20 cm, its own thickness), 5 cm clearance between non-incident nodes and
between a node and a foreign wall (a T-joint sitting exactly on that wall is
incidence, not a near miss), and a room interior of at least 25 cm2 after the
masonry is subtracted. Thresholds are absolute and do not scale with cell_cm.
newViolations() implements the spec's inheritance boundary: only violations
introduced by the write are reported.

Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:29:49 +03:00
claude[bot]andCodex 806f7f784c docs: review document for #329
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:29:49 +03:00
Codex 3120924e26 docs: spec #329 revision 3 — AC7 proves the per-surface refusal channels
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:29:49 +03:00
claude[bot]andCodex 8205897149 docs: review document for #329
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:29:49 +03:00
Codex 73b665ede6 docs: spec #329 revision 2 — per-surface refusal channels, AC5 split, absolute thresholds
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:29:49 +03:00
claude[bot]andCodex d67bb11de0 docs: review document for #329
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:29:49 +03:00
Codex 5266d2f6be docs: spec #329 — wall junction limits and an honest sharp apex
Issue: #329
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 23:29:49 +03:00
claude[bot] 8161394178 docs: review document for #267
Issue: #267
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 19:57:33 +00:00
Matysh 118062bb8c test: close device presentation review findings
Issue: #267
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 22:41:46 +03:00
claude[bot] 8b0ad08db2 docs: review document for #267
Issue: #267
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 19:31:52 +00:00
Matysh 6efc315ba6 refactor: make device presentation decisions explicit
Issue: #267
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 22:06:10 +03:00
claude[bot] b87322ed5f docs: review document for #267
Issue: #267
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 18:26:00 +00:00
Matysh c5e145269b docs: specify device presentation decisions
Issue: #267
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 21:17:18 +03:00
claude[bot] 2294d46f3f docs: review document for #264
Проверка (CI) / Документация: гайды, ченджлоги, скриншот-индекс (push) Failing after 1m0s
Проверка (CI) / Процесс: process.yml идентичен в main и dev (push) Successful in 42s
Проверка (CI) / Провенанс коммитов: трейлеры и эталоны (push) Successful in 48s
Проверка (CI) / Процессный гейт: диапазон, трейлеры, статусы issue (push) Failing after 57s
Проверка (CI) / Классификация изменённых файлов (push) Successful in 55s
Проверка (CI) / HACS: валидация репозитория (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Переиспользование: это дерево уже проверено (push) Successful in 47s
Проверка (CI) / Hassfest: манифест интеграции (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Бэкенд: pytest в Home Assistant (push) Skipped
Проверка (CI) / Фронтенд: типы, юниты, мутанты, синхрон бандла (push) Successful in 6m44s
Проверка (CI) / Golden-кадры против принятых эталонов (push) Failing after 15m20s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 1 из 3) (push) Failing after 17m46s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 3 из 3) (push) Failing after 20m39s
Проверка (CI) / Перф-смок: бюджет времени кадра (push) Failing after 8m1s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 2 из 3) (push) Failing after 25m38s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки: все шарды зелёные (push) Skipped
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 18:05:24 +00:00
Matysh 722f26a3c5 docs: refresh screenshot source fingerprint
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 20:43:34 +03:00
Matysh 4a833c5e13 test: keep resize preflight mutant effective
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 20:32:12 +03:00
Matysh ba66698f55 refactor: extract resize controller
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 20:30:07 +03:00
claude[bot] ef32d2326f docs: review document for #264
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 16:58:08 +00:00
Matysh 536b750d03 docs: address resize controller spec review
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 19:53:48 +03:00
claude[bot] c46c714c58 docs: review document for #264
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 16:51:56 +00:00
Matysh 6e1aea3ae7 docs: add resize controller user scenario
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 19:43:45 +03:00
Matysh a3e329950a docs: specify resize controller extraction
Issue: #264
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 19:43:17 +03:00
Codex 78850a8733 build: rebundle after the package.json script addition
Проверка (CI) / Провенанс коммитов: трейлеры и эталоны (push) Failing after 8m3s
Проверка (CI) / Процессный гейт: диапазон, трейлеры, статусы issue (push) Failing after 8m2s
Проверка (CI) / Классификация изменённых файлов (push) Successful in 52s
Проверка (CI) / Переиспользование: это дерево уже проверено (push) Successful in 1m30s
Проверка (CI) / HACS: валидация репозитория (push) Failing after 35s
Проверка (CI) / Процесс: process.yml идентичен в main и dev (push) Successful in 7m32s
Проверка (CI) / Документация: гайды, ченджлоги, скриншот-индекс (push) Successful in 7m53s
Проверка (CI) / Hassfest: манифест интеграции (push) Failing after 23s
Проверка (CI) / Фронтенд: типы, юниты, мутанты, синхрон бандла (push) Successful in 13m14s
Проверка (CI) / Бэкенд: pytest в Home Assistant (push) Failing after 13m21s
Проверка (CI) / Golden-кадры против принятых эталонов (push) Failing after 26m7s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 1 из 3) (push) Failing after 31m4s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 3 из 3) (push) Failing after 34m5s
Проверка (CI) / Перф-смок: бюджет времени кадра (push) Failing after 12m59s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки в браузере (шард 2 из 3) (push) Failing after 45m46s
Проверка (CI) / Смоки: все шарды зелёные (push) Skipped
The bundle embeds the source fingerprint, which covers package.json; the
release:notes script addition moved it, so the three bundle copies must be
rebuilt in the same change.

Issue: #328
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 18:59:10 +03:00
Codex 1ac91e43fd build: stable release notes follow the owner's aggregation rules (#328)
A stable body aggregates the changelog since the previous STABLE release,
not since the last beta; in-beta-only bugfixes are excluded by the curator
(the draft lists every candidate with its source section); the small-fixes
filler line is legal only when the range carries user-visible work not
itemised in the body — a single-issue hotfix ships without it, and body
bullets must link their issues so the rule stays checkable.
scripts/release-notes.mjs prints the aggregation draft and verifies
docs/RELEASE-NOTES.md (npm run release:notes -- <tag> [--verify]); the
verifier rejects the v1.68.1-style empty filler by execution. STATUS.md
release mechanics updated in the same commit.

Issue: #328
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 18:55:41 +03:00
Codex 6a3ac52258 ci: the performance-workflow contract test follows the renamed labels
The test pins the literal workflow name and the release-gate label; both
moved to the Russian names of #327.

Issue: #327
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 18:50:02 +03:00
Codex 1a8b480355 ci: every workflow and job carries a human-readable Russian name
Owner decision (chat, 2026-08-27): the running check's name must say what it
does, in Russian. Scripts locate workflows by file name (release-gate.mjs ->
validate.yml), so display names are free; job ids and needs are untouched.
The same content is cherry-picked to main because release workflows execute
from the default branch and process.yml must stay identical in main and dev.

Issue: #327
User-Visible: no
2026-08-27 18:46:53 +03:00
Matysh ec957a7c88 merge: reconcile process repair into dev 2026-08-27 17:41:28 +03:00