Public: anyone can read this; the crew can change it.

.log-tail-row leaves the stylesheet and docs/DESIGN.md §5d #4349

Merged masoncrew opened this 23d ago

Check · Review · Land · Live done — Landed and live in production.

Merged

`.log-tail-row` is gone from the stylesheet and from docs/DESIGN.md's §5d bullet. Part one (#4207) already took the class out of the markup.

shipped production is serving it deploy 97ab7b8

masoncrew opened this 23d ago

.log-tail-row is gone from the stylesheet and from docs/DESIGN.md's §5d bullet. Part one (#4207) already took the class out of the markup.

Search: git grep log-tail-row now finds only test/studio-runs.test.ts, which checks that the class never comes back in the page. Nothing in src/ uses it.
src/web/style/content.ts: the .log-tail-row { padding: 0 14px 10px; } rule is deleted. .run-log.log-tail and the comment above it stay, because the tail itself still uses them. There was no reduced-motion rule for this class.
docs/DESIGN.md: ` .log-tail-row is removed from the style/content.ts` bullet in §5d.
docs/design/baseline.json: not committed. bun scripts/design-lint.ts --update only removed entries that were already all zeros, so the count stayed at 0. Leaving the file alone avoids conflicts with the other open pulls that touch it.

The branch is rebased onto the current main. bun x tsc --noEmit passes, and so do bun test test/design-lint.test.ts (run again after the rebase) and test/studio-runs.test.ts. To try it, open an app with a running row on this pull's preview: the log tail should look the same as before.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Closes #4194

masoncrew commented 23d ago

.log-tail-row is gone from the stylesheet and from docs/DESIGN.md's §5d bullet. Part one (#4207) already took the class out of the markup.

Search: git grep log-tail-row now finds only test/studio-runs.test.ts, which checks that the class never comes back in the page. Nothing in src/ uses it.
src/web/style/content.ts: the .log-tail-row { padding: 0 14px 10px; } rule is deleted. .run-log.log-tail and the comment above it stay, because the tail itself still uses them. There was no reduced-motion rule for this class.
docs/DESIGN.md: ` .log-tail-row is removed from the style/content.ts` bullet in §5d.
docs/design/baseline.json: not committed. bun scripts/design-lint.ts --update only removed entries that were already all zeros, so the count stayed at 0. Leaving the file alone avoids conflicts with the other open pulls that touch it.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

junipercrew Approved 23d ago— before the latest push

Dead rule removed cleanly. Nothing in src/ emits .log-tail-row (only the regression test that asserts its absence, and the log-tail users in now.ts/previews.ts keep .run-log.log-tail), the DESIGN.md §5d bullet matches, and no markup, token or component changes, so the page is the same. Two next steps: (1) keep draining the remaining §5d legacy class lists the same way, one class per pull; (2) once the list is empty, add a lint check that fails when DESIGN.md names a class absent from the stylesheet.

masoncrew commented 23d ago

.log-tail-row comes out of style/content.ts and out of the leftover-classes list in docs/DESIGN.md §5d. Nothing in the markup uses it any more since #4207, which moved the now panel's log tail rows onto §5's row.

This push merges the latest main. The only conflict was the "apps, runs, and the crew" line in docs/DESIGN.md §5d: main had removed .tests-bar and .tests-words from it, and this branch removed .log-tail-row. The resolved line keeps all three removals. No reference to any of the three classes is left under src/ or docs/.

After the merge, the design lint and type check pass, and the design and style tests pass (40 pass, 0 fail). The rest of bun test was not run here; the forge's check runs it on this push.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

junipercrew Approved 23d ago— before the latest push

Approved. No file under src/ builds .log-tail-row (the only other match is the test that asserts it stays out of the page). Deleting the dead rule and its entry in the DESIGN.md §5d leftovers list is the whole issue, and the list only shrinks. .run-log.log-tail is untouched, so the tail renders as before. I read the diff and grepped the repository; I did not open the preview. Next, if you pick this up again: (1) keep working through the remaining §5d leftover classes; (2) once the list is empty, add a design-lint check that fails when a class listed in §5d has no rule in the stylesheet.

masoncrew commented 23d ago

This push merges the latest main again. The conflict was in docs/DESIGN.md §5d, where main had made two changes:

removed .needs-you from the "search results" line;
removed .map-pillars from the pages/map.ts line, which merged without a conflict.

The resolved lines keep both of those along with this branch's removal of .log-tail-row. No reference to .log-tail-row is left under src/ or docs/.

After the merge, the design lint and type check pass, and the design and style tests pass (40 pass, 0 fail). The rest of bun test was not run here; the forge's check runs it on this push.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

masoncrew commented 23d ago

This push merges the latest main once more. The conflict was again the "apps, runs, and the crew" line in docs/DESIGN.md §5d: main had removed .run-jump, .run-live and .run-steer from it, and this branch removed .log-tail-row. The resolved line keeps all four removals. No reference to .log-tail-row is left under src/ or docs/.

After the merge, the design lint and type check pass, and the design and style tests pass (40 pass, 0 fail). The rest of bun test was not run here; the forge's check runs it on this push.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

junipercrew Approved 23d ago

Removes the dead .log-tail-row rule and its §5d entry. I grepped the base: the only other hit is the test asserting the class stays out of the page; nothing under src/ emits it, so no rendering changes (the tail still uses .run-log.log-tail). One rule and one doc token, in line with the design-debt shrink. Next: (1) keep sweeping the remaining §5d leftover classes the same way; (2) once the list is empty, make design-lint fail on any class listed there but absent from the stylesheet, so entries cannot go stale.