Three findings of the v1.70.0-beta.1 audit, all on the transition path
added by #82, all of the same shape — the new path did not inherit a
property the old one had.
B1: persisting the zoom moved into _settleCameraTransition only, and a
cancellation never settles. Touching the plan mid-flight — the literal
scenario of the issue — froze the shown frame and threw it away; before
which kind it is: the user one (_stagePointerDown) persists the frame
that stays on screen, the eleven structural ones keep writing nothing.
The distinction is now also written down in spec #82 §13, which had one
line for both.
B2: the anchor was read from the presented (lagging) frame while the
zoom accumulated from the target, so a six-notch trackpad series walked
the point under the cursor 17 px away — against §10's own promise. Both
now come from the same state. Spec §10 said to use the presented frame
and to keep the anchor within 0.5 px; those two are incompatible, and
the paragraph is corrected rather than left as a trap.
M2: the feather freeze keyed on the two gesture flags, which an
animated transition does not set, so every tween frame rebuilt the blur
region. It keys on 'the camera is still' now.
Guards: unit tests pin the anchor at 1e-9 across 8/16/33 ms series and
prove zoom accumulation is untouched; the smoke checks the shown zoom is
the stored one, that a structural cancellation stores nothing, and that
the anchor holds; three mutants (cancel-loses-zoom, anchor-from-
presented, feather-thaws) were run by hand and each reddens.
User-Visible: yes
Issue: #396
r6 Medium: AC4 was measurable only on a developer's machine — no
workflow invoked mypy, so a typing regression in any of the six
allowlist modules reached dev unnoticed while the issue claimed
measurable backend quality. Coverage and lint had continuous gates;
typing had a text comparison of a committed list.
The backend job now runs mypy right after ruff, from the same pinned
dependency file (mypy==2.3.1 — an unpinned checker would redden on code
that never changed). The step derives its module list from the
pyproject.toml strict allowlist instead of duplicating it, because a
drifted duplicate is a green step checking the wrong modules, and it
refuses an empty list rather than passing silently.
Guarded twice: a contract test pins all three facts (pinned checker,
a step that really invokes it, list read from pyproject) and the new
typing-gate-stops-running mutant reddens when the invocation is
neutered.
User-Visible: no
Issue: #42
Rebase resolution: dev's #392 introduced tests_backend/requirements.txt
(python 3.14, phcc 0.13.357, homeassistant 2026.8.3) — exactly the
single-source-of-pins AC of this issue, so the duplicate
requirements_test.txt is dropped and both workflows keep installing from
the #392 file; ruff is added there for the lint step. The backend
reuse key no longer names the dead file (tests_backend/ as a root
already covers the new one); ARCHITECTURE.md points at the real path.
User-Visible: no
Issue: #42
Rebased onto dev with #82 (camera transitions), #74 (marker undo) and
the re-accepted goldens; bundle trees are rebuilt from the rebased
sources and the screenshot capture is retaken on this HEAD — manifest
AND all PNGs committed together.
User-Visible: no
Issue: #42
The previous commit refreshed docs/images/screenshots.json but left the
re-rendered PNGs out of the index — CI compared the committed manifest
against the committed (stale) images and failed on every hash.
User-Visible: no
Issue: #42
Bundle trees are rebuilt from the rebased sources (the pre-rebase build
commit was dropped during the rebase and the trees recreated), and the
doc capture is retaken on the rebased HEAD.
User-Visible: no
Issue: #42
pytest-homeassistant-custom-component 0.13.317+ require python >=3.14
while the CI runner is 3.13: 0.13.316 is the newest installable release
and resolves to the same homeassistant==2026.2.3 the previously green
unpinned pip line produced. voluptuous is unpinned again — homeassistant
pins 0.15.2 itself and a 0.16.0 pin deadlocks the resolver.
The screenshot capture is refreshed after the any-gate source fix of
e8243d1e, which changed src/ without recapturing (the standing rule:
every src commit needs capture + check-docs).
User-Visible: no
Issue: #42
Tooling: requirements_test.txt becomes the single source of backend CI
dependencies; pyproject.toml configures ruff (E/F/B/I, E501 excluded by
decision) and mypy strict for a grow-only allowlist of six pure modules
(junction_limits annotated to pass). The 42 substantive ruff findings
are fixed — the B023 loop-variable closures bind their variables as
parameter defaults instead of hiding behind noqa, and every remaining
noqa carries a reason (guarded by a test).
Errors: const.ERROR_CODES / ERROR_CODE_FAMILIES formalise the stable
contract; the scanner test proves every emitted code across BOTH paths
(send_error literals; class attrs, literal and variable-passed
MarkerControlError codes, f-string families) is registered and has a
localized message — 22 missing backup.error.* keys added in all four
languages. invalid_passage_fields / invalid_partition_opening_jamb_margin
ship structured JSON details (legacy format read-compat for one beta),
and _errText renders code-first: unknown codes localize, raw English
messages go to the console.
CI: the backend job lints with ruff, refuses a silently skipped HA
harness (import + collect threshold), measures branch coverage over
pure+harness, fails below the committed baseline and uploads
coverage.xml. quality_scale: docs-troubleshooting/examples honestly
done, test-coverage/strict-typing carry staged progress.
User-Visible: yes
Issue: #42
Record the unchanged screenshot set against the typed editor runtime source after verifying the capture output and preserving the reviewed PNG bytes.
Issue: #391
User-Visible: no
Саморевью по указанию владельца, с оговоркой о независимости. Одна находка
Low на себя: утверждение «эмит тот же» в сообщении cbf5cc1b неверно —
побайтовая сверка нормализованных сборок показала расхождение в одном месте.
Поведение при этом тождественно, разбор в документе.
Отдельно разобрано, почему восемь разошедшихся golden-сцен не из этого
коммита.
Issue: #390
User-Visible: no
claude[bot]