Skip to content

RepoFileAdoptionTests: FleetCollectionHealthMemoTests joins the LF-reading roster — the one red #3738 left on dev (#3735) - #3746

Merged
erikdarlingdata merged 1 commit into
devfrom
fix/3735-lf-roster
Sep 19, 2026
Merged

erikdarlingdata merged 1 commit into
devfrom
fix/3735-lf-roster

Conversation

@erikdarlingdata

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Mechanism

#3738 landed FleetCollectionHealthMemoTests, whose source pin anchors the collection-health statement's tail across three line breaks (FROM v_collection_log / WHERE / AND / GROUP BY) and the CreateCommand line on the CommandTimeout line that follows it — the two facts the memo promised not to touch, asserted as the exact shape they were in, which a single-line anchor could not tell from a rewrite. Anchors that span a newline read through RepoFile.ReadRepoFileLf, and RepoFileAdoptionTests.s_lfReaders is the bounded roster of the files that do — compared against the tree for equality, so a file joining the LF reader has to be named there with its reason.

This PR names it. One entry, five lines, with the comment saying why the pin's anchors cross a line break.

Evidence

What it does NOT do

Tests

RepoFileAdoptionTests executed here in the lane's mactest harness beside the whole reader/memo set — 363/363 — before this commit was first pushed. CI on this PR is the same census on the real Darling.Tests project.

Follow-up to #3738 (#3735, already closed at merge).

…ading roster (#3735)

Its source pin anchors the collection-health statement's tail across three line breaks and the
CreateCommand line on the CommandTimeout line that follows it — the two facts the memo promised
not to touch, asserted as the exact shape they were in — so it reads LF-normalised and the
bounded roster has to name it. The one red of 11,472 on the first CI run.
@erikdarlingdata
erikdarlingdata merged commit 0caf572 into dev Sep 19, 2026
6 of 7 checks passed
@erikdarlingdata
erikdarlingdata deleted the fix/3735-lf-roster branch September 19, 2026 14:40
erikdarlingdata added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2026
… PRs across the #3653, #3542 and #3691 waves, #3704, #3710, #3712 and #3735, spliced once (#3751)

Sixty-five PRs merged to dev since #3672 (the first splice) across two seats -
the coordinator's #3653 brains-review residue lanes and the wave-2 worker's
#3542 / #3691 PostgreSQL-target engine lanes - and by rule none touched this
file; each returned its entry to a buffer. This is the one splice. Text-only;
one file; nothing outside ## [Unreleased] and the definition block moves.

[Unreleased] gains a ### Changed between ### Added and ### Fixed (Keep-a-Changelog
order) for the nine entries whose subject is a designed behaviour that now behaves
differently - routing (#3712 confidence chooses the channel), gating (#3692 tempdb
persistence, #3734 blocking/LRQ gates, #3724 peak-and-mean), the wire shape
(#3719 one error envelope), the review guard's drift arm (#3673), lineage
metadata (#3723) and two grading changes (#3693, #3747). Twenty-two new
capabilities append to ### Added (the sixteen PostgreSQL-target fact families and
rungs, CONFIG_CHANGED, the recurrence label, the V134/V135 columns, the review
traps file, the measurement census); thirty-two defects append to ### Fixed.
Order within each section is ascending PR number, as #3672 did.

Every entry is one line and verbatim from its buffer (trailing whitespace only).
Four PR pairs fold into one entry as the buffers wrote them (#3738+#3746,
#3683+#3686, #3681+#3685, #3726+#3729); #3695 carries three entries. #3673 has
no issue and cites none, like the file's ninety-six other ref-less entries. Five
definitions added ([#3691], [#3704], [#3710], [#3712], [#3735]) at the end of the
[Unreleased] run, which stays one ascending run (3517..3735). No archive touched;
the split was not run.

tools/changelog/changelog_archive.py verify: all PASS (1,483 bold entries, floor
1,329; 1,363 distinct refs resolve; 1,372 definitions; CRLF throughout; 409,263
bytes under the ceiling). Client-hygiene grep over the file: zero hits.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant