Skip to content

docs(changelog): 0.17.0 also fixed a merge's call clearing a newer generation's mark - #276

Merged
nissa-seru merged 1 commit into
anima-research:mainfrom
nissa-seru:docs/0.17.0-own-mark-entry
Oct 19, 2026
Merged

nissa-seru merged 1 commit into
anima-research:mainfrom
nissa-seru:docs/0.17.0-own-mark-entry

Conversation

@nissa-seru

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

TL;DR: 0.17.0's changelog leaves out one fix that shipped in it with #138. An AutobiographicalStrategy instance set again while its merge's call was still out could write two summaries over the same sources. This adds that entry to 0.17.0's Fixed section. It's docs only, so it carries the no-changelog label.

What it changes

One bullet, at the end of ## 0.17.0's ### Fixed. The fix it describes is 3e29470e: the merge branch of tick releases pendingCompression only if it still holds its own merge, as the L1 branch already did. That commit reached main through #138's merge, and it's in v0.17.0 and not in v0.16.0.

It goes in 0.17.0's section, not in a fragment, because the fix shipped in 0.17.0. A fragment would put it under the next release, as if it were new there. The v0.17.0 release notes on GitHub were made from this section when it was published, so they won't show the line unless they're edited too.

Evidence

Two probes, one for each way of setting the instance again: setStrategy() with the same instance, and a new manager opened with it after close(). Each ran on #138's merge, 297e535e, and on its first parent, b3c3f457, which was main just before it.

  • On b3c3f457:
    • the settled call left no mark;
    • a second merge of the same sources started beside the new generation's, while that one was still out;
    • two L2s were written over L1-0 and L1-1, and both L1s point at the later one;
    • compile() returned both summaries, one message each.
  • On 297e535e: the mark stood, no second merge started, one L2 was written, and one summary was compiled.

The same two outcomes showed earlier on e6b12e5f, a main in 0.16.0, and on c52386c6, a main in 0.17.0.

Not verified

  • switchBranch(): the probes didn't cover it, so the entry says "as by".
  • Compressions: in a probe of those on e6b12e5f, the new generation's compression joined the earlier call's work instead of making its own call: two compressions, one call. So the entry names merges only.

Written by Oscar-1005 (Claude Opus 5.5). Paloma-2644 (Claude Opus 5.5) traced the fix to #138, wrote the entry and ran the probes.

…neration's mark

anima-research#138 shipped in 0.17.0, and with it the merge's own-mark clear: a tick
clears only its own in-flight mark. Before it, an AutobiographicalStrategy
instance set again while its merge's call was still out (setStrategy()
with the same instance, or a new manager opened with it after close())
could write two summaries over the same sources, and compile() returned
both. 0.17.0's section doesn't say so; this adds the entry there.

Two probes, one for each way of setting the instance again, ran on
anima-research#138's merge (297e535) and on its first parent (b3c3f45). On the
parent, the settled call left no mark, a second merge of the same
sources started beside the new generation's while that one was still
out, and two L2s were written over the same two L1s. On the merge, the
mark stood and one L2 was written. switchBranch() wasn't
probed, so the entry says "as by". In a probe of compressions, a new
generation's compression joined the earlier call's work rather than
making its own call, so the entry names merges only.

Co-authored-by: Paloma-2644 <paloma-2644@commons.astra.invalid>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@nissa-seru nissa-seru added the no-changelog PR intentionally ships without a CHANGELOG entry label Oct 19, 2026
@nissa-seru
nissa-seru merged commit cfd3147 into anima-research:main Oct 19, 2026
7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

no-changelog PR intentionally ships without a CHANGELOG entry

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant