T10.7 - full suite result recorded: 1284/1288 across 40 files

Ticks the last open box on T10.7. Two files fail and both were already logged
as pre-existing, with git diff main...HEAD showing this branch touches neither:
BL-028 (assets_check, whose "no MICRON_DB_URL" premise is violated by any
machine that has the var set) and BL-029 (generalinfo_check, flagging an rgba
literal last touched by 8efe624).

A third entry in the sweep, token_check rc=2, was my runner's mistake rather
than a failure: token_check.py is not a pass/fail member of the suite, it is a
capture/diff tool that requires --out or --compare and prints usage when run
bare. Recorded at the done-when so the next person sweeping tests/*_check.py
does not chase it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-08-24 09:31:43 -05:00
parent e0008670fc
commit 79787b3e9f

View File

@@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ preservation.
- [x] the empty-password case is proved by nulling `Connection`, so any call to `bind()` would raise — it asserts the guard returns *before* the transport, not merely that the result is a failure
- [x] `smoketest.py` and `seed_demo.py` document which credentials they now need (T10.8)
- [x] the removed password-reset checks are called out, not silently dropped — `console_dialogs_check.py`'s docstring records the coverage loss and where the prompt kit is still covered
- [ ] the full `tests/` suite passes with no DC reachable — 8 of ~40 run so far, all green; full sweep running
- [x] the full `tests/` suite passes with no DC reachable — **1284/1288 checks across 40 files**, Aug 24. Two files fail, both proven pre-existing and unrelated (`BL-028` `assets_check`, `BL-029` `generalinfo_check`): `git diff main...HEAD` shows this branch touches neither file. `token_check.py` is not a member of the suite — it is a capture/diff tool that requires `--out` or `--compare`, and a sweep script that runs it bare gets a usage message and exit 2.
**Scope note.** This task was estimated as far larger than it turned out to be. The
premise was that four checks sign in and would all need the seam; in fact `seed()` mints