didericis
71c0f8ed88
prd-number-check / require-numbered-prds (pull_request) Successful in 11s
tracker-policy-pr / check-pr (pull_request) Successful in 21s
test / image-input-builds (pull_request) Successful in 48s
test / integration-docker (pull_request) Successful in 1m4s
test / unit (pull_request) Successful in 2m52s
test / coverage (pull_request) Failing after 20s
"Does the installer work" and "can a new user actually run a bottle" are
different questions, and collapsing them is what made the previous run
ambiguous. Split them into two cycles over the same throwaway account:
test a macOS system WITHOUT the prerequisites set up for this user,
which is the default state of every new account since the Apple
`container` service is per-user. Asserts the install is sound;
reports backend readiness without failing on it, because
install.sh provides no backend and cannot regress one.
test-ready the same system WITH them. Runs `container system start` for the
throwaway user, then demands doctor go fully green, backend
included — the end-to-end claim.
The new `prereqs` step runs `container system start` rather than
`bot-bottle backend setup --backend=macos-container`, because that subcommand
does not start anything: it checks, then tells you to run `container system
start` yourself (backend/macos_container/setup.py, "no privileged host setup
required"). The harness runs what the product actually asks for.
test-ready sets BB_TEST_REQUIRE_BACKEND, so it demands exactly what `test`
merely reports. Both share one cycle function; the step count and the PASS
claim are the only differences beyond the extra step, so neither variant can
drift from the other's teardown or dirty-account guarantees.
Rig covers the distinguishing case directly: identical host state where `test`
passes on install soundness and `test-ready` starts the service and reaches a
green backend, plus the service-start failure and an install failure under
test-ready. 22 scenarios, all passing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WEfZZhakx13bxTfXcZCoS5
Docs
How this project records what it builds and why — and a guide to picking the right document for what you're capturing.
When to write which document
| Artifact | For |
|---|---|
Design workflow (docs/design-workflow.md) |
How discussion becomes canonical design, how dependencies are recorded, and when implementation may begin. |
Glossary (docs/glossary.md) |
Canonical term definitions — what words mean in this project. |
PRD (docs/prds/) |
A feature: what to build, scope, success criteria. |
Research note (docs/research/) |
A landscape/tradeoff investigation. |
Decision record (docs/decisions/) |
A decision that isn't itself a feature — a policy, a convention, a "we will / won't do this," or a load-bearing choice made inside a larger PRD that deserves to be discoverable on its own. |
A decision that's fully specified by a PRD doesn't need duplicating in a decision record. Write one when the decision would otherwise be buried in prose, lost in an issue thread, or have no in-repo home at all (small requests that don't merit a PRD; non-feature choices like merge strategy or a trust posture).