{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > keeps observes when both sides agree"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > observes through a merge > keeps observes when both sides agree"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > merges disagreeing observes to covering"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > observes through a merge > merges disagreeing observes to covering"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > admits a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings (RULING 5)"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > RULING 5: a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings > admits a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings (RULING 5)"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > admits the single carrier under oneOf and nested positions too (RULING 5)"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > RULING 5: a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings > admits the single carrier under oneOf and nested positions too (RULING 5)"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > still rejects a single carrier whose sibling is NOT syntactically disjoint (RULING 5 constraints)"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > RULING 5: a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings > still rejects a single carrier whose sibling is NOT syntactically disjoint (RULING 5 constraints)"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > still rejects an integer/number carrier-sibling pair \u2014 value-set overlap, not string equality (RULING 5 constraints; review F1)"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > RULING 5: a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings > still rejects an integer/number carrier-sibling pair \u2014 value-set overlap, not string equality (RULING 5 constraints; review F1)"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > still admits a genuinely value-disjoint scalar pair beside the numeric fix (RULING 5)"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > RULING 5: a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings > still admits a genuinely value-disjoint scalar pair beside the numeric fix (RULING 5)"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > still rejects allOf with an ifc-carrying branch (RULING 5 scope)"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > RULING 5: a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings > still rejects allOf with an ifc-carrying branch (RULING 5 scope)"}}
{"date": "2026-08-30", "from": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > still recurses INTO the admitted carrier (nested divergence refuses)"}, "to": {"k": "unit", "s": "runner", "n": "mergeCfcSchemaEnvelopes > RULING 5: a single ifc-carrying branch with type-disjoint siblings > still recurses INTO the admitted carrier (nested divergence refuses)"}}
{"date":"2026-09-12","from":{"k":"unit","s":"runner","n":"storedSchemaCoversCandidateEnvelope (merge-skip decision) > fails closed on differing tuple arities (PR #4969 review)"},"to":{"k":"unit","s":"runner","n":"storedSchemaCoversCandidateEnvelope (merge-skip decision) > fails closed on differing tuple arities"}}