Second base move while this card was open: 559f0eb -> a6e64fb. Only
CHANGELOG.md conflicted; test_arbitrage.py auto-merged (TARIFF-12 used
section 8b, this card uses 10, so the two do not collide).
CHANGELOG: both entries under the single ## Unreleased in MERGE ORDER -
TARIFF-12's row and section precede this branch's, because it landed
first. No version number is picked; PKG-06/07's note stands untouched.
WHAT TARIFF-12 CHANGES FOR THIS CARD - written out in decision note §8
rather than left silent, because the question is a fair one.
A served plan can now be up to TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S = 3 * TARIFF_REFRESH_S
= 5400 s old, where before it was at most one refresh interval, and
at() is what answers "what does it cost right now" out of that older
plan.
* PER-POINT SPAN: unaffected, structurally. Every window is derived
from the neighbours' ABSOLUTE start instants - datetimes in a frozen
dataclass in a tuple, which cannot move - and _cover_table() runs
once at construction over data that cannot change. A plan's AGE is a
property of fetched_at/tariff_at, never of a window. The index cannot
go stale, which is a small positive under TARIFF-12: a kept plan now
lives longer and there is nothing in it that needed recomputing.
* ONE-HOUR CAP: unaffected. It bites only at a hole; walking further
into a series crosses more windows, each resolved on its own
neighbours.
* THE TAIL: reachable for the first time, and §2's choice survives it.
At the shipped 48 h horizon the tail is ~46.5 h beyond anything a
90-minute-stale plan can be asked about. But price_horizon_h is
int(1,72), so a 1 h horizon is a SUPPORTED configuration, and a
90-minute serve-stale window against a 1 h series puts `now` past the
end. Under the chosen rule a quarter-hourly 1 h series ends at :45,
its window closes on the hour, at() raises Absence, _act() idles and
§11.4 sends the site to the static profile. Under the REJECTED flat
one-hour tail the same stale plan would have traded against the :45
print for up to 45 minutes after the interval it describes had ended.
So TARIFF-12 does not weaken the decision - it is the first thing
that makes it reachable, and it selects the same answer. The rule
should be re-read if TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S is ever widened again.
* TariffPlan.from_feed is a pure predicate on `origin` and TARIFF-12
keeps or replaces a WHOLE PLAN OBJECT. It never splices two reads
into one series, so it cannot hand at() an unsorted or duplicated
point list.
RE-GRADED ON THIS BASE, not carried over: all 29 test files green;
app/price.py byte-identical to the TARIFF-10 merge (90d8ca31f7c0109d,
85953 B) because TARIFF-12 does not touch it; M1 re-driven at +68 B,
red on the same 24 named checks across both files; M3 re-driven at
ZERO BYTES, red on the same 4. Each purged before the run and reverted
with the fingerprint re-checked, from a card-specific harness at
/home/homelab/.cache/t14-mut/ with a mktemp backup inside it.
This branch contributes zero diff to app/main.py and app/static_tariff.py.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
CI on PR #80 was NOT a test failure. The workflow's "grade the merge, not
the branch" step refused the PR because it does not apply, and said so
itself: "REFUSED: refs/pull/80/head does not merge into release/1.0.
NOTHING HAS BEEN TESTED. This is not a test failure - no test ran."
Conflicts were CHANGELOG.md and test_price.py; app/price.py auto-merged.
CONFLICTS RESOLVED
* CHANGELOG.md - both entries belong under ## Unreleased. TARIFF-10's
table row and section come first because it landed first. No version
number is picked here; PKG-06/07's note stands untouched.
* test_price.py - BOTH cards appended a section "13". Nothing is
dropped: TARIFF-10's stays 13, this card's is renumbered 14, and
TARIFF-10's temp-directory teardown stays at the end of the file. The
two share no fixture, option dict or helper name.
WHAT TARIFF-10 CHANGES FOR THIS CARD - nothing in the reasoning, and the
check is recorded rather than asserted (decision note §7).
In app/price.py the two do not meet: TARIFF-10 added provider_id() and
provider_configured() beside price_option() and routed load_prices()
through them - the option-reading layer, touching nothing in _Series,
at(), covers(), window() or _cover_table(). The merged at() is
byte-identical to the one the mutations were driven against.
Behaviourally TARIFF-10 makes run_tariff_refresh() run with arbitrage
OFF, so a provider-configured site now has a standing plan - and
therefore a _Series - where before it had none. It does NOT add an at()
consumer to the 30 s tick: static_status() builds a STATIC plan (hourly,
immune), main.py calls only plan.words on the fetched plan, and
price_forecast.price_permits()/begin_phase() have no caller in main.py
at all. So TARIFF-10 neither creates nor closes any exposure this card
is about - it enlarges the defect's reach the moment such a site arms
trading, which strengthens the fix without changing it.
RE-GRADED ON THE MERGED TREE, not carried over
* all 29 test files green;
* all EIGHT mutations re-driven, purged before each run, each reverted
with the fingerprint re-checked. Same verdicts and same red-check
counts as before the merge: M1 (the shipped one-hour scan, +68 B) red
on 24 named checks across both files; M3 (the ZERO-BYTE tail rule) red
on 4; M2/M4/M6 on 1 each, M5 on 2, M7 on 16, M8 on 14.
* Clean app/price.py on the merged tree: 90d8ca31f7c0109d, 85953 B.
* None of TARIFF-10's 650 new lines of checks moves under any of the
eight - they grade resolve_tariff()'s reachability from a
configuration, not the lookup.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
`_Series.at()` asked `s <= u < s + 1 h` of every point IN LIST ORDER and
returned the FIRST match. On the hourly shape every fixture in this
repository carried before TARIFF-08 that is right by accident. Belgium
moved to a 15-minute MTU on 2025-10-01 and the live day-ahead feed
returns 96 points at 900 s, where it is wrong twice over - measured
against the shipped code at 5059e28:
series: 02:00=0.10 02:15=0.11 02:30=0.12 02:45=0.13 03:00=0.14
ask +15min -> 02:00 0.10 <-- WRONG (wanted 02:15)
ask +60min -> 02:15 0.11 <-- WRONG (wanted 03:00)
ask +75min -> 02:30 0.12 <-- WRONG (wanted 03:15)
Inside the first hour the :00 point wins because its hour has not run
out. From the second hour on the answer is not even the top of the hour
- the first point still inside its own hour wins - so the error
compounds with depth into the series.
`arbitrage._act()` tests `here.start == v.cheapest.start` /
`== v.dearest.start` to decide whether this interval is the buy one or
the sell one. That identity almost never held, so the strategy idled
through exactly the interval it exists to trade, and read §8.3's
`here.provisional` and §17's `price < 0` off the same wrong point.
`static_tariff.py` emits hourly points, so static sites were never
affected; this is reachable only down the dynamic path TARIFF-08/09
made work.
THE RULE: a point covers from its own start until the next point's
start, and never more than one hour. Quarter-hourly takes 900 s,
hourly is unchanged, and a MIXED series - FCST-04's carry-forward puts
hourly carried points beside quarter-hourly firm ones, spacing
[900, 3600] in 70 % of soak samples - takes each point's OWN gap.
The one-hour cap is load-bearing: FCST-04 leaves an hour OUT when
nothing published it and yesterday has no value, and `at()` raising
Absence for it is what sends the caller to the static profile (§11.4).
Uncapped, "until the next point's start" would stretch the point before
a three-hour hole across the whole hole and answer every instant in it
with a stale price.
THE LAST POINT is given the same span as the point before it (one hour
when it is the only point). A flat one-hour tail would answer 00:30
TOMORROW with today's 23:45 price. The cost - a mixed series ending at
the firm/carried seam loses its last 45 minutes to Absence - is argued
in DECISIONS/TARIFF-14-the-window-a-point-covers.md §2 rather than
buried; the direction is the safe one.
`at()` now reads a point's NEIGHBOURS, so it would depend on
sortedness. It establishes that itself: the lookup index is sorted by
UTC start once, at construction, so no caller's list order reaches it.
A series handed its 96 points in reverse answers identically, and that
is a check. `covers()` shared the defect exactly - it has no rule of
its own, it asks `at()` - and is fixed by the same change; `window()`
did not, and its docstring now says why.
Nothing about §9.3 or a point's `start` changed. PricePoint still has
three fields; the span is derived from the neighbours, never stored.
Graded by test_price.py section 13 (900 s, 3600 s, mixed, holes, the
tail, caller order, duplicate starts, covers()/window(), the no-data
contract) and end to end by test_arbitrage.py section 10, which drives
decide() over a 96-point quarter-hourly day whose cheapest and dearest
quarters are deliberately NOT on a whole hour, plus §17, §8.3 and the
mixed series. Eight mutations, all red, including a ZERO-BYTE one on
the tail rule; byte deltas and what the arbitrage file could not see
are in the decision note §6. All 29 test files green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
