Potential fix for 1 code quality finding

[mobileskyfi]

This PR applies 1/1 suggestions from code quality AI findings.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 7308c7ef-20a4-4fea-aa58-5f7edf610eb5

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch ai-findings-autofix/test-unit-winbox-cdb-write.test.ts

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[mobileskyfi]

Not applying this one. Two problems:

1. It doesn't compile. The diff deletes const backups = await listWinBoxCdbBackups(path); (and expect(backups).toHaveLength(retention)) but the following lines still reference backups, so the test would fail to build/run.

2. Even corrected, it weakens the test. Deriving the expected backup timestamps from total - 1 / total - retention re-implements the production retention arithmetic inside the test. The existing hardcoded literals (2024-01-01T00-00-07 / -03) are a stronger anchor oracle precisely because they're independent of the code under test.

Closing without applying. The underlying finding (magic numbers in assertions) is noise here — concrete literals are the intended style for these anchor tests.