Registry family enumeration and reproduce keying disagree on the family id #298
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Observed
Registry::load_family_members()enumerates campaign families withFamilyRunRecord.family = "<name>-r0-s0", but the reproduce entry points (aura_runner::reproduce::{load_family, reproduce_family, reproduce_family_in}) key on the sibling form"<name>-r0-s0-0"— the id thataura_campaign::execute,StageFamily.family_id, andcampaign_runs.jsonlcarry. Passing the enumerated id is rejected withno such family, although the family reproduces bit-identically under the-0form.Consequence: the natural library workflow "list the families, then reproduce one" dead-ends on its first attempt; the two id forms and their relationship are undocumented in the public surface.
Reproduction
Fieldtest example
fieldtests/cycle-295-shell-boundary/sb_4_reproduce.rs(transcriptout_sb_4_reproduce.txt, run against5006766): enumerate viaload_family_members(), feed the returnedfamilystring toload_family→no such family; append-0by hand → reproduces bit-identically.Expected
One id vocabulary across enumeration and reproduction: whichever form is canonical (C18 identity), the other side accepts or emits it consistently, and the public docs state the id shape.
refs #295