From 04931387f52315073c873a6a213a0bb4b9b788dc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: tegwick Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 16:41:10 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Record the stale-claim correction alongside the others A message to railiance-platform listed the upstream issuer pin as outstanding when the committed receipt showed it done ten hours earlier. Corrected to them directly; recorded here with the other two instances because the pattern is the point, not the individual slip. docs/evidence/ is the authoritative artifact for live proofs in this repository, and reading it is cheaper than the corrections it prevents. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NV9oijZukGyGbRQGGKnK4P Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 713576@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: 384c511d-9bce-4cb8-a676-2aef6c0c8df6 --- .../KEY-WP-0028-browser-client-field-validation.md | 14 ++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/workplans/KEY-WP-0028-browser-client-field-validation.md b/workplans/KEY-WP-0028-browser-client-field-validation.md index 2876402..46b0672 100644 --- a/workplans/KEY-WP-0028-browser-client-field-validation.md +++ b/workplans/KEY-WP-0028-browser-client-field-validation.md @@ -74,6 +74,16 @@ Two consequences, both corrected within the session: unimplemented was withdrawn with a rationale pointing at the implementation. Nothing was built on it. +A third instance followed the same day, outside this task: a message to +railiance-platform (d361bf28) listed the upstream issuer pin as outstanding when +`docs/evidence/2026-09-09-upstream-issuer-pin.json` showed it done ten hours +earlier — `check_before.issuer_matches: false`, then pinned to +`https://auth.coulomb.social`. Corrected in dd827b9f. The concern itself was +sound; only the claim that it was still owed was wrong, and the two are worth +separating rather than letting the correct half excuse the other. + The lesson worth keeping: in a repository where several sessions work at once, -blocker prose ages faster than the code it describes. Re-read the source before -acting on a workplan's description of it. +prose ages faster than the code and the receipts it describes. `docs/evidence/` +is the authoritative artifact for anything claiming a live proof here. Read it +before writing "outstanding", "unproven" or "not done" — that check is cheaper +than any of the corrections it would have prevented.