Progress update, 28 Aug 2026

Updates are bullet-point summaries generated with AI from my commits and build notes, then checked by me. Project articles and learning notes are written by me.

A section the reviewers will not pass used to be re-selected every night forever, because the used-set is built only from committed articles and a skip writes none. Recently-skipped sections now sort last: deprioritised, never excluded, since the trigger was a typo in a source guide and burning a section permanently would cost runway for a transient fault.
The other half of that issue was never real. Four documents said skipped run records carry no source block, described as the cheaper and more urgent of the two fixes. They always have carried one: it is set before all three skip paths, and every committed record proves it. The stall was visible in the records the whole time. What is missing is anything that looks at them, which turns a pipeline bug into a monitoring gap, and that is the real precondition for putting this on a timer.
The first cover generated with no human choosing the image came back as a 2001 bugeye Subaru for an article about the 2007 car. Not a bad roll. The prompt gets a title, a heading and a description, and an article identified only as “third-generation” contains no year anywhere. The tally for unsupervised covers is now 1 good, 1 wrong, and the wrong one is precisely the failure no automated check in this repository can detect.
Ben chose to automate cover approval anyway (apply, then notify) over a pull-request model where nothing reaches the site until he merges. That decision rested on three-of-three accepted first time, and the record is no longer three of three.
The notification design turns on one constraint: GitHub does not notify you about your own activity. The job authenticates as Ben, so any design where the job opens the issue produces silence. An Actions workflow runs as a different actor, so the bot opens the issue and mentions him.
The guard that checks the image generator received the exact prompt cannot be a proof, and the code said it was. The CLI runs image generation in code mode, so its rollout records the program rather than the value, and there is no literal to compare against. Kept, renamed to attestation, and deliberately left out of the table of real controls.
Two tests were vacuous and only mutation found it. One passed with its cleanup code deleted, because the failure it injected fired before anything existed to clean up. Rollback has two kinds of work, restoring what changed and removing what was created, so it needs two injection points, not one.