Skip to content

docs: record what the first preview canary taught the release runbook - #27

Merged
immakermatty merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/DEV-6633-runbook-canary
Sep 30, 2026
Merged

immakermatty merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/DEV-6633-runbook-canary

Conversation

@immakermatty

@immakermatty immakermatty commented Sep 30, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Status: ready for review

Proč

První ostrý průchod DEV-6633 (preview 0.0.44-preview.20260930.1 → canary → stable 0.0.44-lazurio.1) ukázal, že runbook tvrdil něco, co neplatí, a chyběly mu dva kroky, bez kterých canary shodí službu.

Co se mění (jen docs/operations/lazurio-fork-release.md)

Co se nemění

Žádný kód, workflow ani kontraktní test. Vydání 0.0.44-lazurio.1 zůstává ze source 0d7c12f4; tenhle PR nic nevydává.

Ověření

vp fmt --check na souboru, node --test scripts/lazurio-release-contract.test.mjs 11/11. Postupy jsou ověřené živě na Spectoda VM101 a personal-immakermatty (#20).

Mission Control: DEV-6633 M6.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

RetriggerConfidence Score: 4/5

The PR should not merge until the emergency downgrade procedure specifies how to restore the database before starting the older service.

Findings

  1. P1 Rollback starts before database restoration ▶

Summary

The PR updates the release runbook with lessons from the first preview canary, including a manual SQLite backup, launcher-protocol handoff, Update-button prerequisites, rollback guidance, and a desktop test result.

  • The emergency rollback instructions need a safe database-restoration order.

Diagram

%%{init: {'theme': 'neutral'}}%%
flowchart TD
  A[Back up canary database] --> B[Install preview without restart if protocol changes]
  B --> C[Install service with new CLI]
  C --> D{Canary healthy?}
  D -- Yes --> E[Release stable]
  D -- No; migrations ran --> F[Stop service]
  F --> G[Restore database and handle WAL sidecars]
  G --> H[Start compatible older service]
Loading

Reviews (1) · Last reviewed commit: "docs: record what the first preview cana..."

Comment thread docs/operations/lazurio-fork-release.md Outdated
The DEV-6633 canary (0.0.44-preview.20260930.1 on Spectoda VM101 and a
personal VM) showed three things the runbook did not say:

- a local `t3 update` does not go through the launcher trial or database
  backup, so the canary takes a SQLite backup first;
- when a release raises the service launcher protocol (2 -> 3 between
  v0.0.42 and v0.0.44), the old CLI must not restart the service: install
  without restart and switch with the new `t3 service install`; the
  recovery for a service that was already knocked over is documented;
- the Update button only works under a launcher of the protocol the new
  release needs; otherwise preflight refuses safely and the Machine needs a
  one-time local switch or a raised Machines pin.

It also corrects the claim that the local path runs a trial, adds the
database restore to the emergency downgrade, and records the desktop check.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@immakermatty
immakermatty force-pushed the claude/DEV-6633-runbook-canary branch from 825aeb4 to 40eab44 Compare September 30, 2026 08:31

@agentrozjedemeai agentrozjedemeai left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@immakermatty Approved on the exact head 40eab44. Scope is only docs/operations/lazurio-fork-release.md. Checked the local-update/no-trial distinction, consistent pre-update SQLite backup, protocol-2-to-3 handoff and recovery, guarded Update button, and emergency downgrade ordering against the CLI source and canary issues #22/#25/#26. Local release contract: 11/11; git diff --check: clean. Four required PR checks green, no unresolved threads. Emergency cross-migration rollback is explicitly not yet exercised live. This review does not dispatch a release.

@immakermatty
immakermatty merged commit 3e29f93 into main Sep 30, 2026
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants