docs(record): ecosystem sign-off for the 2026.9.11.2 batch - #608
Closed
Sunrisepeak wants to merge 2 commits into
Closed
docs(record): ecosystem sign-off for the 2026.9.11.2 batch#608Sunrisepeak wants to merge 2 commits into
Sunrisepeak wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Section 9. Four findings that are about the ecosystem rather than about any
one change:
* A proxy check refused correct output TWICE IN TWO REPOSITORIES on the same
day -- the MSI size ratio and, earlier, the AppImage size bound. Both are
now direct questions: the AppImage is run and its output asserted, the MSI
is installed and the extracted program compared byte for byte.
* The #599 fix reproduced the shape of the defect it fixed. It reasoned about
which shard runs 233 instead of enumerating the jobs that run the suite,
and the macOS lane caught the third one. The correction is an enumeration,
which can be re-checked.
* The ecosystem rule cost one new payload and otherwise only declarations.
The interesting case is `xim:python`: its x86_64-only table was the STATED
reason emsdk could not declare an interpreter -- an argument that was true
and was a request for a package, not a licence to use the host. `/dev/kvm`
is where the rule stops, and a test asserts it is the only warning left.
* The rule composes with the licence, not above it: the ecosystem supplies
what it may, and the licence says what it may. Getting that order wrong is
asymmetric -- three GitCode objects were uploaded before the licence was
checked, GitCode assets cannot be deleted, and the only remedy is that no
recipe references them.
Also states what is still open rather than implying it: the four target rows
are the next PR with their size named, and `xim:wix` is a gap with a known
shape.
… upgrade path is measured across two binaries THE CORRECTION LANDED IN THE RECORD AND NOT IN THE CODE. The design document carries the re-taken 2026-09-11 measurement -- Emscripten 6.0.9 reports `_LIBCPP_VERSION 220108` (llvm 22.1.8) and clang 24.0.0git -- while the `wasm32-emscripten` row's own comment still said llvm 20.1.7, `200100` and clang 22.0.0git. Two copies of one decision, and the second written without reading the first. The rule those numbers support is unaffected and is exactly why they have to be right: the module surface must match the LIBRARY, never the compiler. A stale number in a comment becomes a stale number in a diagnostic, and then in somebody's install command. Also simpler than the comment first said: 6.0.9 SHIPS the surface (134 files), so `em++` links `import std` with no generated surface at all. SECTION 11.8 GAINS A TWO-BINARY MEASUREMENT. An absent-tolerance claim is about what a previous version wrote, so a unit test over a synthesised header is not the whole criterion: 1. released 2026.9.10.2 writes `graph=normal;schedule=none;accel=default` 2. 2026.9.11.2 appends `;dist=none` -- fingerprint change, full rebuild, no error 3. 2026.9.11.2 again -- `Finished dev in 0.00s`, the fast path replays 4. 2026.9.10.2 again -- `0.00s`, the downgrade does not choke Step 4 says what the tolerance is worth: the version is in the fingerprint, so two binaries never share a graph directory and an older mcpp never reads a `dist=` field at all. The read side is defence in depth rather than a live path -- the same conclusion 11.2 reaches from the other direction.
Member
Author
|
Folded into the single mcpp PR for this goal, per the goal's one-PR-per-repo rule. The ecosystem sign-off (section 9) and the two record corrections are now commits on the branch that also carries the target-row work, released as one version (2026.9.11.3) rather than as a separate documentation PR. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Section 9 of the six-issue record: the ecosystem-level review the goal asks for, written after the work landed and against what shipped rather than against the plan.
Four findings that belong to the ecosystem rather than to any one change:
xim:python's single-arch table turning out to be the stated reason emsdk could not declare an interpreter;Also states what is still open with its size named: the four target rows are the next PR, and
xim:wixis a gap with a known shape.Documentation only.