mesh/repo-check head bb5a342863ee merged into trunk 9c166398f204 — pass: its merge-check.sh passed, each part in its toolchain: merge-check.sh (go), merge-…
The review of mesh-controller #304: a proposal of more than three keys showed only the names of the rest,
and its Details could carry no value, so Approve bound values the operator never saw. The router now
shows an ask's WholeDetails in the note in place of its Details on a kind that proves who answers, held
to the secret rule alone, and refuses an ask whose whole details carry a secret's shape. Telegram keeps
the note whole when a message is too long, cutting the body first and saying so, and escapes the note
as every other part. SDK at mesh-sdk f474544.
The operator would not read the Telegram ask for ADR 0343: thirty plain lines, every clause on one, no bold,
no summary. A settings proposal was the same wall of text, its values masked so the approval was blind.
- messenger: an ask's message is the asker's headline and explanation alone; who asked and when, what each
answer does, the expiry, where else it is answered and the asker's Details travel as the message's note
(asks.Message.Note). Answered, the message is one line, "You chose Approve at 16:06 on Telegram ·
<headline>". An explanation that does not read at a glance (asks.Glance) is shown and logged. On a kind
that proves who answers, an ask's values are shown whole (asks.Ask.Whole), held to the secret rule alone
(from the earlier work on issue 383, #178).
- telegram: every message in HTML, never reworded: the title bold, a key line monospace, the note apart in
a collapsed blockquote; markup escaped. A tap is compared by its words, whitespace aside, and a message
shown before is still compared by the digest it was kept under.
- desk-channel: the note follows the body.
- mesh-knowledge: a record that needs the operator carries a brief (headline, summary, at most three
points), the 30th per-record rule; its ask shows the brief and never the clauses. An ask made before is
composed again as it was asked (form), so its warrant still holds.
- claude-code: an instructions proposal's explanation is one summary line (the proposer's, or the
module's), its text in the Details; a question's context is at most 300 characters and its recommendation
one point. Older proposals and questions keep their form.
The SDK is pinned at mesh-sdk 9588871 (fix/639-an-ask-reads-at-a-glance), which adds Message.Note and
asks.Glance.
A replaced ask's message was left open as if the newer ask took it over, but
the newer ask opens a message of its own, so the old one kept offering answers
nobody takes. It now ends on every channel with 'Replaced by a newer question',
and the minute's sweep ends any such message left from before. A record that
clears no longer keeps what a walk owed of it (the review of PR 238).
The review found that a double tap while the phone's spinner turned would be
answered 'That answer was not taken', reading as if the approval failed; it is
now 'You already chose Approve at 13:30: recorded.' and does nothing more. The
fallback toast no longer promises a change that may not come (a stranger's
tap), the wait outlasts the router's 10 s wait for the controller's root word,
the channel's own refusals stay in the chat too, and the store's error words
stay in the journal.
At 13:30 on 2026-10-10 the operator approved two questions on Telegram and saw
nothing happen: the channel acknowledged each tap with no words, before the
router had judged it, and the edit that removed the buttons kept the question's
title, adding only a line under it that rings nothing.
The router now answers a chosen option in reply to the tap, once the ask's end
is recorded and before the question is edited: "You chose Approve: recorded,
and claude-code was told." (or, when the bus did not take the warrant, that it
is told when it does). A refusal already replied with its reason. Telegram
holds a tap's acknowledgement for the router's word and shows it as the tap's
own toast; a word with a body (a refusal's reason, Details) also stays in the
chat. Without a word in 8 seconds the toast claims nothing, and the late word
goes to the chat. A secret is never a toast.
An ask's own message, once answered, carries its outcome as its title:
"You chose Approve at 13:30 on Telegram · <headline>", then whether the asker
was told. The asks protocol carries no result back from the asker, so nothing
more is claimed of what it did.
A word kept from a moment ago, not free, refused an ask taken just after root became free again, and
the asker keeps a refusal until something changes. Taking an ask asks the controller fresh, still
before the work is taken (the lab's proof found it).
N1-router: another account's /start offered the desk an unlink of the operator's account in its first
hour, and a desk click, which a program on the desk machine can forge, unlinked it and barred it for a
day, again and again. An unlink at the desk in the first hour now bars nothing: any account, the
operator's too, links again at once with a code from the desk; the day's bar stays for an account
removed by its own approval or by root, and root's allow-link lifts any bar. The words say which.
Lows: the controller's root-free word is asked before the work is taken (it waited up to 10 s inside
it) and the answer is judged with that fresh word; inside the work only a recent word is read, and a
failed ask drops the old one. An answer whose effect the content rule withholds is not offered.
mesh-sdk moves to 16984aa. Each test failed before its fix.
The review of 2026-10-09: the router read the absence of an agent-root condition as a pass, and its minute
hung on a break-glass file, taking the work it already held. An approval now rests on the controller's
verb root-free, asked live for the router's machine and the channel's, failing closed on every other
answer, and a stale word on the kinds promises no verified sender. Break-glass runs in the minute, says
on every channel what root did, and ends the router's own open questions. An ask offering an approval is
answered only where it could be approved; a message says who asks, what each answer does and what expiry
does. The router's own asks bind the account they are about; a link is checked against one per kind as it
is made; an unlinked account does not come back by a code within a day; a fresh link is unlinked from the
desk; no link begins while the desk cannot show its code, and a code is marked secret on every path. Links
are bounded per account in the router's state; a warrant's message id cannot be foreseen. Moves to
mesh-sdk 76902998 (canonical digests).
The lab's proof showed a stranger's refused tap said as "That answer was not taken" on the operator's
own chat (the router sends to the linked account), where it reads as the operator's own answer refused.
It now says which account tried, that nothing was done, and what it may mean.
A warrant now carries the digest of the ask exactly as the router took it, so its asker acts only for
the ask the person was shown, with what each option binds. The router refuses an ask whose approving
option binds nothing (the SDK's Check). Its own unlink and relink asks bind the act they perform, and
it performs that act only on a warrant for that ask. mesh-sdk moves to d4077b4.
jochen
jschoubben