mirror of
https://github.com/stablyai/orca.git
synced 2026-09-21 16:02:20 +00:00
Neil
6c3b97b950
* fix(mobile): a scope refusal is not a missing method on the Relay pairing probes
The desktop's mobile allowlist gate runs before its RPC dispatcher, so a method an
older desktop predates is absent from both and the phone is answered `forbidden`,
never `method_not_found`. Keying the "too old for Relay, stay on LAN" fallback on
`method_not_found` alone therefore never fired against the exact desktop it exists
for: first-time pairing threw instead of committing a LAN host.
`isPairingRelayRpcUnavailable` accepts both codes at the three pairing probe sites.
It is pairing-scoped on purpose - `isMethodNotFoundRefusal` has four other consumers
that must keep reading `forbidden` as a refusal, not as absence.
The main-side test pins the claim the fallback rests on: the dispatcher really does
answer `forbidden` to a mobile-scoped device and `method_not_found` to a runtime one,
and this build allowlists both probes, so `forbidden` on either can only mean an
older desktop.
* fix(mobile): leave a breadcrumb when a desktop refuses relay pairing
The LAN fallback now commits a host instead of throwing, so the refusal code
was the only record of why a phone ended up without a relay endpoint and
nothing wrote it down. Log it on the path that swallows it.
Narrow `isPairingRelayRpcUnavailable` to the two codes it matches rather than
to `RpcFailure`: a plain failure guard would collapse the *false* branch to
`RpcSuccess`, which a refusal carrying any other code still reaches.
Rename the `'method-not-found'` sentinel in the direct-upgrade reader, which
stopped describing what it covers, and correct two comments that named a
`method_not_found` mechanism the desktop cannot produce for these methods:
both probes have been allowlisted and registered by the same commit since
Relay landed, and an unwired pairing provider answers `runtime_error`.
* docs(wire): record that the mobile surface refuses by scope, not by absence
Two comments cited this page for "a scope refusal is not a missing method" and
the page did not say it — the only nearby statement says the opposite, because
it describes the runtime-scoped surface, where the dispatcher does answer
`method_not_found`. The allowlist gate makes the mobile surface the exception,
and the harness does not run that surface, so this note is the only record.
* docs(mobile): name the pairing site the scope refusal actually reached
The comments and the wire-compat note said this fixed first-time QR pairing.
It cannot: the `relay` block on the pairing offer, both RPC handlers and both
allowlist entries all landed in 77b154d5dd, so a desktop old enough to refuse
the probe also omits the offer block, and that flow commits a LAN host without
ever probing. The site that reached is `upgradeDirectMobileRelay`, which
re-probes every LAN-only host on reconnect: the refusal threw into the
controller's swallowing catch, so the write-once journal it had just written —
and the pending resume secret in it — was never retired.
Also drop two overclaims: the phone's Files and Git fallbacks have read both
codes since they shipped, so this is settled practice rather than a new rule,
and the reason the allowlisted-but-unregistered case cannot ship is
mobile-rpc-allowlist.test.ts, not a convention about what lands together.