Skip to content

fix: clarify recovery conflicts and preview saved contents - #36

Merged
rororowyourboat merged 1 commit into
developfrom
fix/recovery-conflict-clarity
Nov 11, 2026
Merged

rororowyourboat merged 1 commit into
developfrom
fix/recovery-conflict-clarity

Conversation

@rororowyourboat

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

When another tab changes local recovery, the conflict message leaves users unsure whether Retry will replace their live project. Explain that Retry only inspects the saved copy, and state what Restore and Discard keep. Show the pending copy’s actual saved time, filenames, unapplied-draft count and per-file applied/draft byte sizes before replacement.

Strengthen the real two-tab browser scenarios to cover both decisions, cancelled restore confirmation and exact draft preservation. The reload scenario now saves distinguishable successive drafts and verifies that the latest successfully saved source, drafts and both view layouts restore exactly. Add reviewed light/dark desktop/narrow captures and update the user and verification documentation.

Closes #15.
Closes #23.

Validation

  • npm run check: formatting, architecture, TypeScript, 160 Vitest tests and 10 Node checks passed.
  • npm run test:e2e -- --project=functional recovery.spec.ts: all 10 recovery scenarios passed after a fresh production build.
  • npm run test:e2e -- --project=visual --grep 'local recovery dialog|recovery conflict and saved-copy': all 8 scenarios passed without baseline updates after review.
  • New conflict-explanation and file-preview assertions failed against their previous implementations before the fixes.

The existing storage conflict policy and persistence formats are unchanged. These tests do not establish the cause of the report’s original condensed/older recovery copy or demonstrate a fix for silent data loss. Full suites outside recovery and manual screen-reader verification were not run. Hosted CI and deployment are separate from these local results.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Codex Review Summary: ✅ Completed

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-11-11T07:51:11.527588Z 890fe88 PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@rororowyourboat
rororowyourboat merged commit 2f58240 into develop Nov 11, 2026
1 check 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.

Explain competing-tab recovery conflicts and the effect of Retry recovery Make recovery snapshot identity and freshness clear before restoring

1 participant