Codex (!194#1588) is right on the text: #191's criterion is a drill that
runs all six probes with 1 and 5 passing, not two probes passing and four
recorded. Probe 2 (mislabeled ordinary PR) and probe 4 (a re-run of the
completed ceremony) were run on the same consumer, un-archived for them and
archived again after.
Probe 4 diverges in mechanism because Forgejo 8.0.3 has no run-rerun API:
the ceremony was re-run by reproducing its input rather than replaying the
run. The record says so, and says which assert refused.
#191's last acceptance criterion was a live drill against the MERGED tree,
not the candidate. Run against `fda5657`:
probe 1 merge door one release 0.4.1, changelog body, main re-armed
to 0.4.2-dev, both assets uploaded
probe 3 no label refused, nothing created
probe 5 tag door 0.5.0 published, main VERSION untouched
probe 6 bad tag refused, nothing created
The fixture carried an artifact hook this time, dropping `drill asset.tgz`
and `a&b.tgz`. Both survived under those exact names — the encoding fix
proven end to end, in the place it would have failed: after the tag exists,
mid-publish.
The record keeps run 1 (the failure at 9a229ee) beside run 2, because the
failure is why #191 exists and a record that quietly replaced it would be
the kind of tidy history this repo refuses.
Refs #191
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
