#174 merged while this PR was open, so the lane it had just been given
is already a merged lane. Rule 4 removes those rather than relabelling
them — but only once the durable facts are in the handoff, so do both
here in that order.
docs/agent-handoff.md
- §5 gains the lesson: a wait predicate WEAKER than the assertion it
guards is a race on whichever platform loses it, and "wait until the
file mentions X, then assert Y" races whenever Y is stricter than X.
- Two things that generalize past the fix ride with it: a race you
cannot reproduce can still be bitten at one remove (an unsatisfiable
predicate proves the wait is load-bearing; the old predicate still
passing proves a local run cannot tell them apart), and the obvious
fix is sometimes worse — the sibling m4_26 is deliberately left alone
because closing it the easy way trades a precise assertion diff for a
vague five-second hang.
- Header and §1 anchor advance to 0442d78, noting #174 is test-only and
#184 remains the substantive change at that head.
docs/active-work.md
- Remove the #174 lane; the header paragraph now says where it went.
- Canonical base and recovery floor advance to 0442d78. The floor
explicitly rejects 6bee09d as well as 7fd646d, per its own rule that a
check accepting an older commit than the declared base passes on a
tree the file does not describe.
- Bottom-panel lane: 2B-2 is IN FLIGHT, not merely "next" — branch,
worktree, and the fact it is branched fresh rather than stacked. Its
boundaries are restated because they are easy to overrun: production
Hello stays v20, panel_capable stays false, and 2B-3 may not simply
bump the unsolicited Hello.
- dired lane: the re-scout is under way on the existing branch, so #171
keeps its three-round history and the product is a rev 5.
- Both lanes note that main advancing to 0442d78 changes nothing for
them, since #174 is test-only.
The bottom-panel framing doc keeps its 6bee09d ground-truth line: that
is a scouting statement about what was actually read, and re-anchoring
it to a commit nobody re-scouted against would be a false claim.