bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5
dcd4efcea0
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 29s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 59s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 40s
The design surface is for the projects an install tracks. /design read the running app's own stylesheet — names out of a bundled theme.css, values out of getComputedStyle(document.documentElement) — so it could only ever describe the instance serving the page. Scribe is one project among the projects Scribe tracks; it gets no view hardcoded into every install. The mechanism that makes this a tool rather than a mirror already existed and already covers Scribe: scripts/check_design_tokens.py runs in CI against a sheet path it knows nothing about, using check_code_against_tokens — the same engine behind check_snippets_against_system. /design was redundant even here. Removed: DesignView, DesignTabs (nothing left to tab between), api/design.ts, routes/design.py and its blueprint, the /design route, ui_design_system() and its setting, and the Settings picker that designated "this app's UI". utils/designTokens.ts and utils/designDrift.ts go with it — between them they were the browser-reading half. What survives is utils/designValues.ts, which works on a record rather than a document: valueForMode, modesPresent, and resolveDeclared. resolveDeclared gained real isolation in the move. Custom properties inherit and `all: initial` does not reset them, so a probe sitting in this page would resolve any reference a record leaves undeclared against the SURROUNDING app's tokens — previewing another project's system would quietly borrow this one's palette wherever that system was incomplete, and a token already reported under unknown_refs would render as though it were fine. Undeclared references are now blanked on the probe first, so they resolve to nothing, which is what the record says they are. Migration 0075 absorbs ui_design_system_id alongside design_rulebook_id rather than an 0076 undoing it: 0075 has not run anywhere, since dev is unmerged and deploys come from main. Both keys named a design source for the running install, and a project already carries its own pointer. This retires the agreement panel shipped yesterday. It asked whether the sheet was actually loaded and applied — the one question a record cannot answer about itself — but only ever about the app you are already inside. Nothing replaces it; recorded in #2430 rather than quietly dropped. Step 1 of milestone #274. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UaYUaouG9jjhATyuxCKrQs
48 lines
1.5 KiB
Python
48 lines
1.5 KiB
Python
"""retire the two settings that designated a design source for the app itself
|
|
|
|
Revision ID: 0075
|
|
Revises: 0074
|
|
Create Date: 2026-08-03
|
|
|
|
Two keys, retired for the same reason a week apart, so they go in one change
|
|
rather than one migration each:
|
|
|
|
design_rulebook_id which rulebook described how this app should look
|
|
ui_design_system_id which design system this app's own UI was built from
|
|
|
|
Both named a design source for THE RUNNING INSTALL. The design surface is for
|
|
the projects an install tracks, and a project already carries its own pointer
|
|
(`projects.design_system_id`) — so an install-wide designation had nothing left
|
|
to mean. `ui_design_system_id` was introduced by this same migration's first
|
|
draft and never reached a deployed database; it is listed here rather than
|
|
undone by an 0076 that would reverse a change nobody ran.
|
|
|
|
Deleting settings rows by key is safe in a way dropping a column is not — the
|
|
table is free-form key/value, so an install that never designated one simply has
|
|
no row to delete.
|
|
|
|
Downgrade cannot restore what it never recorded, so it is a no-op rather than a
|
|
lie: the pointer lives on the project now, and always did for anyone who set it
|
|
there.
|
|
"""
|
|
from alembic import op
|
|
import sqlalchemy as sa
|
|
|
|
|
|
revision = "0075"
|
|
down_revision = "0074"
|
|
branch_labels = None
|
|
depends_on = None
|
|
|
|
def upgrade() -> None:
|
|
op.execute(
|
|
sa.text(
|
|
"DELETE FROM settings "
|
|
"WHERE key IN ('design_rulebook_id', 'ui_design_system_id')"
|
|
)
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
def downgrade() -> None:
|
|
pass
|