Vuong Hoang
d37b81ab9f
The two dated log sections had never been split, so every one of their 29 entries sat inline and the startup index had grown to 372 lines — which is the cost the two-tier scheme exists to remove, paid on every session that reads the file. 27 entries were over threshold. All 29 now have a detail file under persistent-memory.d/ and a one-line index entry that routes rather than restates. Index: 372 -> 93 lines. No archival. The soft cap fired, but every entry in this repo is dated 2026-09-21 or later, so the under-14-days guard held all of them back — and the split alone took the index well under the target without moving anything out of the active file. The in-flight section is rewritten for the post-release state: nothing is in flight, no gate is outstanding, and the next unit is explicitly recorded as the operator's undecided call rather than as a plan. The session's recommendation (U4, on three grounds) is written down so it does not have to be re-derived, alongside the two alternatives and why they are alternatives. Two dated predictions are carried forward with their dates and their instruments: the U5 adoption re-measure on 2026-09-29, which already reads 3 of 24 announced and 2 with a why from peers told nothing, and the .forever re-count a fortnight AFTER U4 lands, which is U4's own success criterion and is destroyed by running it early.
909 B
A write over a damaged .marks.json wiped the booth
2026-09-21 · booth
A write over a damaged .marks.json was wiping every mark in
the booth. Shipped in v0.2.0, found by the panel (Kimi, converged with
Hulda), fixed in v0.2.1. marks_for is deliberately lenient — unparseable
reads as [] so a review page still loads — and the write path inherited that
leniency through the same reader, so one flag click appended to an empty list and
atomically replaced the file. The fix is an asymmetry, which is the reusable
part: reads stay lenient, writes go strict (MarksCorrupt), damaged bytes stay
on disk, routes answer 409 not 500. A page that renders without an annotation is
recoverable; a file that overwrote the operator's judgment is not. Kimi also
named the class correctly — "an author steeped in the design conversation would
likely read past" it — and that was accurate.