Sync the self-hosting stack

This commit is contained in:
2026-09-04 10:17:37 +02:00
parent bef3ffc0f0
commit d53062d14e
+25
View File
@@ -9,6 +9,31 @@ one of them changed. An entry says which artefact and which version, so `web 0.1
Every version published to a channel appears here. Nothing is written from memory afterwards: a build Every version published to a channel appears here. Nothing is written from memory afterwards: a build
cannot be published without its entry. cannot be published without its entry.
## 2026-09-04 — An approval asks for your decision once, not twice `web 0.129.0`
**A request waiting on you carried Approve and Reject on the card itself, and pressing either one
opened a dialog that asked the same question over again.** Two consents for one decision — and the
second one explained consequences the first had already accepted. It read as a confirmation step. It
was really the only place the plan had ever been shown in full.
So the card decides nothing now. A pending request is a single row: its risk, its title, the first
two lines of what Jarvis intends to do, and how long it has been waiting, how many steps it runs and
how many machines it touches. Opening the row opens the request, and that is where the decision
lives — the whole plan, every step in order, the machines by name, what approving authorises and
what rejecting does, the note if you want to leave one, and the two buttons. The note is still
optional on both, and it is still recorded with the decision.
**Reading the plan is no longer gated on being able to act on it.** Somebody with view-only access
opens the same request and reads the same thing; they simply have nothing to press. That mattered
more than it sounds: the plan used to sit on the card, so folding the card down would have hidden it
from exactly the people who can only read.
Approvals already decided are unchanged — they still expand where they sit, with who decided and any
note they left. So is the approval Jarvis raises mid-conversation for a single command: that one is
one question about one thing, and it is still answered where it is asked.
No API change; take the web image on its own.
## 2026-09-01 — One byte in a command's output could destroy the turn that read it `api 0.106.0` ## 2026-09-01 — One byte in a command's output could destroy the turn that read it `api 0.106.0`
**If you have been seeing `Invalid prisma.message.update() invocation` in conversations, this is **If you have been seeing `Invalid prisma.message.update() invocation` in conversations, this is