1 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5	e1cd629196	feat: the agent derives its version instead of being asked to remember it (4386) ... Operator: the agent's build string could not identify the agent. VERSION was a literal in app.py an author was meant to bump, and nobody did — the September image printed the same "2026-07-17.1" as the July one, so the one surface meant to answer "did my pull work?" answered the same either way. Nothing new was needed. scripts/artifacts.sh has derived a version per artifact since milestone 313, and build-agent has been computing the agent's on every run and printing it to the log. The image just never carried it. Three values, never folded together (rule 149): FC_VERSION YYYY.MM.DD.HHMM from the COMMIT its shipped files last changed in — identical on dev and main for the same source, which is what makes "am I running production's code?" answerable. FC_CHANNEL a sibling field, never a suffix inside the name. FC_REVISION the 12-char sha; the same string as the fc.revision LABEL, so the image and the registry cannot disagree about which commit this is. The page SHOWS the version and COMPARES the revision. Those were one value before, which is how a version acquires a second job and then cannot be changed without breaking the reload banner. An unstamped local build reads `unknown` and compares `local` — absent rather than empty, one spelling of "cannot say". scripts/artifacts.sh joins the AGENT path set in the same commit, and it had to: a version has no backstop. A revision that is computed differently stops matching the published label and forces a rebuild, so it self-corrects; a version is compared against nothing, so a change to cmd_version alone would leave the agent publishing the old format with nothing to contradict it. That is #3202's finding, and the agent was rightly exempt only while it had no version of its own. tests/test_artifact_paths.py pins it. Also corrects two build.yml comments claiming agent/ had not changed since 2026-07-17. Both were already false — it changed 2026-09-23 — and one of them is the stated rationale for the force_build escape hatch. Rewritten without dates: how long an artifact has been quiet is a `git log` question, and its answer in a comment is wrong the next time anyone commits (lesson #4383). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LVjrnpQjRgHdvq95rASoiR	2026-09-24 07:07:31 -04:00