lfg2025/archy
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 24 Pull Requests 1 Actions Packages Projects Releases 64 Wiki Activity

docs(02): record user override for unmeasurable OpenWrtGateway surface

Browse Source 
No OpenWrt device is connected to this node, so the surface cannot be
exercised and no post-fix measurement is obtainable. The user decided to pass
it for this milestone. Also notes that its earlier baseline/regressed figures
measured a disconnected-device UI rather than the real screen, and records the
residual risk for the next milestone.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
archipelago 2026-07-31 11:42:35 -04:00
parent 8569f5376a
commit b4350e244f
1 changed files with 9 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
.planning/phases/02-ui-performance/02-VERIFICATION.md
View File

@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ verified: 2026-07-31T15:30:00Z
status: human_needed
score: 6/8 must-haves verified
behavior_unverified: 0
overrides_applied: 1
overrides_applied: 2
overrides:
- gap: "Timing regressions on the named slow surfaces"
scope: "Discover only — the other four measurable surfaces were substantially fixed by plan 02-11 (web5 566->275, server 738->574, fleet 330->790, app-details 1204->1231; openwrt-gateway could not be re-measured this pass, see gaps_remaining below — its unfixed status is NOT covered by this override, which is scoped to Discover only)"
@ -13,6 +13,14 @@ overrides:
accepted_by: "Dorian (user)"
accepted_at: "2026-07-31"
evidence: ".planning/phases/02-ui-performance/02-12-PLAN.md (CANCELLED, investigation retained), 02-11-SUMMARY.md, 02-PERF-FINAL.json"
- gap: "OpenWrtGateway has no post-fix measurement"
scope: "openwrt-gateway only (secondary screen, PERF-03 scope)"
decision: "ACCEPTED — pass without a post-fix measurement for this milestone"
rationale: "No OpenWrt device is connected to this node, confirmed directly by the user: 'no openWRT is connected so if that is a dependency then we can pass it for now.' Without hardware the surface cannot be exercised at all, so no measurement is obtainable either way -- and by the same token its earlier 895ms/1460ms figures measured a disconnected-device UI (an error/empty state), not the real screen, which means it should arguably never have been counted among the confirmed regressions. The background-contention fix that restored the other surfaces applies application-wide and is expected to benefit this one equally, but that is inference from analogy and is recorded as such, not as evidence."
accepted_by: "Dorian (user)"
accepted_at: "2026-07-31"
residual_risk: "If an OpenWrt device is later connected and this screen is slow, it is unmeasured territory -- re-run the single-surface harness then. Tracked for the next milestone rather than blocking this phase."
evidence: "user decision in session 2026-07-31; 02-PERF-FINAL.json (openwrt-gateway null); 02-11-SUMMARY.md"
verifier_note: "Override block is well-formed (must_have/reason/accepted_by/accepted_at all present) and corroborated by three independent artifacts (02-12-PLAN.md's cancellation notice, 02-11-SUMMARY.md's scope-deviation entry, and STATE.md's Blockers/Concerns line) that agree on wording and mechanism. No raw chat transcript exists in-repo to cross-check 'Dorian said X' against, which is a structural limitation of this workflow (planning artifacts, not conversation logs, are the durable record) — this is noted, not treated as disqualifying, since the attribution is specific, consistent across artifacts, and the accompanying technical rationale (blast radius, CSS animation-fill-mode mechanism) is independently verifiable and correct."
re_verification:
previous_status: gaps_found