A public fork of this project worked out several things worth having — a
theme toggle, an archive for finished events — and ideas are not code:
nothing here carries a licence obligation, so this is thanks rather than a
term, and it belongs in the credits rather than in NOTICE with the terms.
Credited by GitHub handle and fork URL, not by name. The commits behind that
fork carry a third name again, and a handle is the one identity that is
verifiable and stable.
Hardcoded, unlike the source and studio credits above it — nothing in the
feed knows a fork exists, so there is nothing to derive it from.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Every screen got the same 672px column, so a desktop reader read a phone page
with two thirds of the window empty — and the one design criticism the release
thread produced was formed from a screenshot.
Past lg the page splits along the line this codebase already draws: what it
tells the reader to do — the next deadlines, tonight's dailies — pins to a
rail on the left and stays there while the lists it shows them scroll beside
it. The footer and the settings panel become columns rather than a long fall
of small grey text. Below that breakpoint nothing moves: the same split puts
the instructions first in one column.
The rail's rule sits on the panel rather than the column. The panel is short
and the list beside it is long, so a full-height divider would spend most of
its length walling off a gap.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Nothing a reader marks, types or ticks ever leaves their browser, so there is no
account and no server-side record to look anything up in after a report arrives.
Whatever the form captured is all there will ever be — which is the argument for
structured forms over a blank box, and for the bug form carrying the footer's
"event data last refreshed" line as a prefill. A stale calendar and a genuinely
wrong parse are indistinguishable from outside, eight sources cannot be fetched
from CI at all, and that line is the only thing that separates the two cases.
The feature form states the three constraints up front, because "sync across my
devices" and "have a model read the page" both have settled answers and a reader
deserves them before typing rather than after. It also points source requests at
the assessed-and-declined table: the loudest feedback on the first release was
that the game list is too short, so that is the request that arrives most, and a
wiki that forbids automated access or only archives finished events cannot be
used no matter how often it is asked for.
Blank issues stay enabled. A form that turns someone away loses the report, not
the noise.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
The footer only spoke up past the two-day threshold, and then only as a
count of stale sources. A page silent about its own age reads as current,
so it now says when the data last refreshed on every load — absolute date
plus relative age, next to where the warning appears. This is the half of
PRD F7 that was never built.
Where the number comes from is the whole point. `freshness()` in
src/shared/feed.ts takes the newest lastSuccessAt and never generatedAt:
the feed is rebuilt on every deploy whether or not anything was refetched,
so a build stamp would report a calendar as minutes old while its events
came from a fixture captured months ago. A game is also only as fresh as
its oldest source, or Endfield's live wiki would vouch for its stalled
Game8 page. That matters concretely here — eight sources cannot be fetched
from CI at all, so this notice is what stands between a reader and a
confidently stale calendar.
The stale warning now names the lagging games and how far behind each is,
because a count is not something a reader can act on while a name tells
them which source page to check. Two exceptions found by rendering it
against the real feed: past four games it summarises the remainder, and
when every game is behind — what a refresh that stopped running looks like
— it collapses to one sentence rather than ten names repeating one age.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
The footer thanks every wiki and every studio the feed touches, but never
said who assembled it. The byline sits with the source-code link, since
that is where someone goes when they want the person rather than the page.
Both personal links carry rel="me" so the site and the profile can verify
each other, and the GitHub mark is now a component because two links use it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
It still thanked only Game8 and hardcoded the studio list, so wiki.gg went
uncredited and unmentioned in the disclaimer after being added as a source.
Sources and studios are now read from the feed and the game registry, so
adding either credits the right people automatically. A hardcoded credit goes
stale the moment someone adds a source, and out of date is the one thing a
credit must not be.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Game8's editors compile the calendars this depends on, and the studios make
the games — both belong on the same screen as the data rather than one
navigation step away.
States plainly that this is an unofficial fan-made tool with no connection
to Game8, HoYoverse, Kuro Games, Hypergryph or Hotta Studio, and that the
source page is the authority when the two disagree.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
