Why this site did not import 0.0.32
Nine proof banks were sealed, their digests matched, and the import was still refused. A capture can be exactly the file that was sealed and still show a product that has moved on.
An importer that copies and trusts is a copy command in disguise. The one this site uses already refused an asset without a level of proof, a path outside the bench, or a digest that does not recompute. It could not refuse a whole bank that had aged 1.
#Eight conditions, checked on the core repository
| Condition | First check, 2026-09-13 | What was found |
|---|---|---|
| A final 0.0.32 handoff report on the pushed branch | fails | The report exists; a product commit came after it, so it no longer describes the release. |
| tauri.conf.json declares 0.0.32 | holds | It does, on the pushed branch. |
| The core branch is pushed, with nothing uncommitted | fails | The local branch was one commit ahead, with work in progress. |
| The public manifest for this site is present | holds | Present, addressed to the Landing, version 0.0.32. |
| Every asset carries the same product commit | holds | Ten banks and the manifest, all on one commit. |
| Every digest recomputes | fails | A bench was re-rendering one bank while the contract ran; its files no longer matched. |
| No capture predates the product it shows | fails | Sealed on one commit, while the product commit had moved to the deliverables pass. |
| Every asset declares its level of proof | holds | Five declared levels, none missing. |
#And the one a digest cannot see
One capture is declared client verified as the Apple bundle read from disk. Opened, it showed an error line — the published bundles could not be read — and no file at all. Its digest matched perfectly: it was exactly the image that was sealed. That is why the contract carries observations written by eye next to the computed conditions, each tied to the digest of the image that was looked at.
The core regenerated that capture the same evening, and it now shows the bundle with its three files. The first observation did not become false; it became stale, and the contract says so because the digest changed. The second check still refused the import: the core branch was eight commits ahead of what was pushed, and the banks no longer shared one product commit. An observation can refuse an import; it cannot authorise one on its own.
EvidenceThe 0.0.31 bank stays served: its workspace captures, including the deliverables view that does show the three files, keep their levels. The home page shows the 0.0.32 deliverables — dashboard, Excel chart, slide, PDF chart, library, access from Kam and from the notch, persistence after restart — as a dependency, not as proof 3.
#Sources
- Deskworth Landing — the import contract for a core releaseDeskworthInternal document, not published
- Deskworth OS — handover report 0.0.32, the notch, deliverables and the companionDeskworthInternal document, not published
- Deskworth OS — proof bank 0.0.31, the Mission WorkspaceDeskworthInternal document, not published
Read next
- A conversation and a workspace, not a canvasThe desk used to be shown as cards on an infinite canvas. It is now shown as what an analyst actually reads: Kam on the left, the work on the right, and nothing that moves under your eyes.
- In an Excel number format, a bare letter is a dateA workbook passed every structural check — seventeen parts, well-formed XML, no index out of range — and Excel still repaired it on open. The defect was one line and three letters.