fix(delivery): C-77 — name the historical document from the declaration, not a directory - #218
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…on, not a directory Both partners' historical upload passed `name=self._model_path.model_name`. That value comes from the views-models postprocessor DIRECTORY name — a fact in another repository's filesystem. The forecast leg passes the declared `product.CONSUMER_DOCUMENT_NAME`. The two legs upload separately and the consumer selects them separately: forecasts by the newest manifest, historical actuals by category="historical". Both filter on the document name. So if the legs disagree the delivery half-arrives, and the failure mode is an empty endpoint rather than an error -- ADR-013 s4.1a's exact shape, the one that left six orange_ensemble documents stranded in unfao_bucket for months. Delivery-neutral, verified before changing anything: CONSUMER_DOCUMENT_NAME is "un_fao" and the views-models directory is un_fao, so model_name resolved to the same string. No delivered byte changes. What changes is that the agreement is a declaration rather than a coincidence. Fixed now rather than when it broke, because it was about to be sprung. views-models#333 creates CRAF'd's launcher directory this week, and whoever named it would have decided -- without knowing it -- whether CRAF'd's historical artifact was retrievable. The constraint was posted on that issue on 2026-08-04; this removes the need for anyone to honour it. Guard: test_both_delivery_legs_name_the_document_from_the_declaration asserts exactly one forecast leg and one historical leg per partner. Mutation-proven three ways -- revert one leg, add a third, stop declaring on the forecast leg. Its first draft counted with a plain substring and reported three legs where there are two, because `consumer_name=product...` contains `name=product...`; the lookbehind is deliberate. 372 passed / 40 xfailed / 0 failed. ruff clean. Register 83/16/67. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
B1 of the sequenced plan, taken first because views-models#333 is being written this week.
The defect
Both partners' historical upload named its store document from
self._model_path.model_name— the views-models postprocessor directory name, a fact in another repository's filesystem. The forecast leg used the declaredproduct.CONSUMER_DOCUMENT_NAME.The two legs upload separately and views-faoapi/views-crafdapi select them separately — forecasts by the newest manifest, historical actuals by
category="historical"— and both filter on the document name. Disagreement means the delivery half-arrives, and the failure mode is an empty endpoint, not an error. That is ADR-013 §4.1a's exact shape, the one that left sixorange_ensembledocuments stranded inunfao_bucketfor months.Why now, and why it is safe
Delivery-neutral, verified before touching anything.
CONSUMER_DOCUMENT_NAMEis"un_fao"and the views-models directory isun_fao, somodel_namealready resolved to the same string. No delivered byte changes. What changes is that the agreement is a declaration rather than a coincidence.It was about to be sprung. views-models#333 creates CRAF'd's launcher directory. Whoever named it would have decided, without knowing it, whether CRAF'd's historical artifact was retrievable. I posted that constraint on the issue on 2026-08-04; this removes the need for anyone to honour it.
The guard
test_both_delivery_legs_name_the_document_from_the_declarationasserts exactly one forecast leg and one historical leg per partner. Mutation-proven three ways: revert one leg, add a third, stop declaring on the forecast leg.Its first draft counted with a plain substring and reported three legs where there are two —
consumer_name=product...containsname=product.... The lookbehind is deliberate and the comment says so.Verification
Register 83 / 16 open / 67 resolved. The two managers remain in lockstep (normalised diff unchanged at 2 lines, the one known prose divergence).
One residual, unchanged: the guard is a source scan, because the managers cannot be instantiated without Appwrite env and a views-models path manager. That is this repo's standing pattern and the reason #18 exists.