static/style.css is 51,425 lines in one file. Hundreds of selectors are
declared more than once and !important is used throughout, so the rendered
result is a function of source order. Extracting a block into its own file
changes that order, and nothing in the suite would notice - which makes a
51k-line split unfalsifiable and "looks fine to me" the only available
evidence.
This moves no CSS. It captures getComputedStyle over a fixed inventory of
676 elements across three pages, four viewports, both themes and the three
density modes - 16,224 element snapshots - hashes them, and compares against
tests/css_snapshot/baseline.json. A capture takes about 21 seconds.
The bench page synthesises one element per selector from an evidence-driven
list: every selector declared more than once in style.css that can be
expressed as a static compound chain, plus a curated set per feature area.
Redeclared selectors are the ones a reorder can flip. The bench loads
whatever stylesheets index.html ships, so it keeps measuring the real set
once the file is split. tests/test_css_computed_style_snapshot.py also carries
a self-test that swaps two conflicting .attach-strip declarations and asserts
the digest moves, so the harness cannot silently stop watching.
The second half is the asset-manifest check specs/frontend.md asks for,
scoped to stylesheets: every stylesheet referenced by shipped HTML and by the
sw.js precache exists, and index.html and sw.js agree on the ?v= string. They
hardcode it independently today, so a split that updates one and not the
other ships an offline cache nobody notices until a plane.
* docs(specs): restore bootstrap after dev rewrite
* docs(specs): remove runtime inventory snapshot
* docs(specs): reconcile current dev truth
* docs(specs): document scheduled task actions as an owner-attribution source
Owner Attribution covered cookie, bearer-token and internal-loopback
requests. Scheduled task actions are a fourth source and behave
differently: _execute_action passes owner=task.owner off the stored
ScheduledTask row, so no request and no resolved principal are in
flight, and route-level require_user() never runs.
Webhook triggers are the sharp case. They are unauthenticated by
design with the token as the only credential and execute under the
stored task.owner.
Paths cite routes/task/task_routes.py, the canonical location after
the task subpackage move (#6081); routes/task_routes.py on current dev
is the backward-compat shim.
* docs(specs): add chained tasks to the trigger list, refresh dev stamp
Review feedback from RaresKeY on the previous commit.
"Every trigger path" was too broad: success-chained tasks are another
path into _execute_action. Added them with their own citation, and
noted that chaining additionally requires the target task to share
task.owner and rejects cycles, which is stricter than the trigger-side
checks. Softened the lead-in to "these trigger paths".
Line 56 still pointed at routes/task_routes.py for webhook credential
validation. That path is the backward-compat shim on current dev after
the task subpackage move (#6081); repointed to the canonical
routes/task/task_routes.py.
Stamp moved to dev@2a6b09b. Inspection backing that bump was scoped:
every file path cited in this spec was mechanically checked to resolve
on 2a6b09b, and every file:line in the Owner Attribution additions was
read against it. Behavioral claims elsewhere in the file were not
re-audited.
* docs(specs): correct SECURE_COOKIES description to match current behavior
Third of the stale details RaresKeY enumerated. The cookie section
described SECURE_COOKIES as purely opt-in, which stopped being true.
_secure_cookie() (routes/auth_routes.py:89) treats an explicit true or
false as authoritative and derives the Secure attribute from the
request otherwise, including when the variable is unset and when
docker-compose injects it present-but-empty. Either the connection
scheme or the first X-Forwarded-Proto hop being https is enough.
* docs(specs): refresh current dev truth
---------
Co-authored-by: StressTestor <212606152+StressTestor@users.noreply.github.com>
Léo