diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'data')
| -rw-r--r-- | data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp | 148 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp | 140 |
2 files changed, 236 insertions, 52 deletions
diff --git a/data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp b/data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp index 6a40838..c8f1e21 100644 --- a/data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp +++ b/data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp @@ -41,6 +41,14 @@ ; separate regression this same fix round found and reverted (a first ; attempt at "every Sunday says Te Deum" wrongly excluded Christ the ; King, caught by the LMS Ordo's own Gloria axis, 2024-10-27). +; +; F3 was ALSO found to be the same GENUS of extractor bug -- a different +; PARSER shape (not a negation word, an unbounded scan reading a second, +; "-VEL-"-separated printed office instead of the primary one) -- and is +; likewise now CLOSED (l5-f3-readjudication task, 2026-08-22). See F3's +; own rewritten entry below for the full account, including why the +; original finding was misadjudicated as "colitur's own gap" rather than +; recognised as an extraction defect from the start. ; F1 -- OPEN, adjudicated FOR colitur. Fired once: 2026-04-03, Good ; Friday. @@ -108,39 +116,111 @@ ; itself rather than on "every other authority disagrees" -- which is the ; stronger footing, and the one this project's own standard asks for. -; F3 -- OPEN, single-witnessed, colitur's own possible gap (Te Deum -; axis). Fires 6 times, every one of the six dates -; data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp's own L5 already found for -; Gloria: 2026-03-06/07/09/12/21/24, a privileged Lenten or Passiontide -; feria (Class3, RG25) whose own office is impeded and carries exactly -; one commemoration of a Class3 saint. colitur's [te_deum] reads [false] -; (a plain ferial office by every branch {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.te_deum} -; checks); FIUV reads [true] in all six -- confirmed directly against -; the raw pdftotext dump, not merely the fixture: e.g. 12 March, "Ll. 1a -; et 2a (= 2a+3a) de Scr. occ., 3a de festo, Te Deum." -- a genuine, -; unnegated "Te Deum" (neither of the two negative phrasings the -; extractor now checks for), so this is NOT the same failure mode F2/F4 -; were. +; F3 -- CLOSED, MISADJUDICATED, NOW FIXED AT THE SOURCE +; (l5-f3-readjudication task, 2026-08-22). This entry previously read +; "OPEN, single-witnessed, colitur's own possible gap" -- WRONG, and not +; a Te Deum question at all: it was tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's own +; [extract_te_deum] reading the WRONG PRINTED OFFICE on these six dates. +; +; THE ORIGINAL, SUPERSEDED FINDING -- preserved below verbatim, the same +; "retain the wrong reading and say why it was wrong" convention this +; file's own F1 history and data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp's own +; L3/L5 already establish, NOT deleted: fires 6 times, every one of the +; six dates data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp's own L5 already found +; for Gloria: 2026-03-06/07/09/12/21/24, a privileged Lenten or +; Passiontide feria (Class3, RG25) whose own office is impeded and +; carries exactly one commemoration of a Class3 saint. colitur's +; [te_deum] reads [false] (a plain ferial office by every branch +; {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.te_deum} checks); FIUV reads [true] in all six -- +; confirmed directly against the raw pdftotext dump, not merely the +; fixture: e.g. 12 March, "Ll. 1a et 2a (= 2a+3a) de Scr. occ., 3a de +; festo, Te Deum." -- a genuine, unnegated "Te Deum" (neither of the two +; negative phrasings the extractor now checks for), so this is NOT the +; same failure mode F2/F4 were. (This description of what the raw text +; SAYS is still accurate -- the error was reading it from the wrong +; PLACE in the block, below, not misreading the words themselves.) +; +; CITATION [SUPERSEDED, see THE CORRECTION below]: the same +; n.302(b)/RG431(b) text L5 already cites (LT.txt -- a MISSAL rubric, not +; a Breviary one, so its literal text governs the MASS's own Gloria, not +; Matins' Te Deum) does not directly license this finding at all -- +; 237/238 (the BREVIARY rubric {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.te_deum} actually +; implements) has no clause naming a commemoration as grounds for Te +; Deum. What this finding suggested, not established: the DIVINE OFFICE +; may treat a commemorated day more generously than the MASS does for +; exactly this shape (a commemorated saint's own lessons are read at +; Matins even on an impeded day, which could plausibly extend to Te Deum +; by an unwritten or unlocated convention) -- genuinely speculative, +; offered as a research lead for a follow-on task, not a citation this +; entry treated as settled. (There was no such convention: see below.) +; +; WHY NOT FIXED HERE [SUPERSEDED]: SINGLE-WITNESSED (the LMS fixtures +; never captured Te Deum at all, so there is no second Ordo to +; corroborate this shape the way the Sacred-Triduum/BVM-Saturday/vigil +; findings elsewhere in this task were cross-checked). Fixing it would +; need the SAME kernel signature widening L5 already declines for the +; identical reason (`~commemorations` on {!Colitur_kernel.Rite.t.gloria}, +; and by extension a parallel widening of [te_deum] if the two were ever +; to diverge in their own inputs) -- out of a task briefed to follow +; creed's existing seam exactly. Left OPEN for the same follow-on task L5 +; recommends. (No kernel change was ever needed -- the bug was entirely +; inside the EXTRACTOR, tools/, never inside lib/.) +; +; THE CORRECTION, in full (l5-f3-readjudication task, 2026-08-22): FIUV +; prints a "-VEL-" ("or") separator on these exact six dates, dividing +; each day's block into a PRIMARY, strict-1962 office (the feria wins, +; "sine Gloria", the saint commemorated, no "Ad Mat." lessons mentioned +; at all -- an ordinary privileged feria's Matins needs no special note) +; and a SECOND, complete alternative office under the 2020 decree Cum +; Sanctissima (the saint kept outright, "Off. ordinarium", with its OWN +; "Ad Mat. ... Te Deum" lessons). tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's own +; [extract_te_deum] scanned the WHOLE block for "Ad Mat." unbounded, so +; on these six days it silently read the SECOND office's own Te Deum +; instead of the PRIMARY's -- manufacturing a same-day contradiction with +; colitur that this entry first recorded as "colitur's own possible +; gap". There was never a genuine Office-vs-Mass question, and no +; DIVINE-OFFICE convention naming a commemoration as grounds for Te +; Deum: the "unnegated Te Deum" the original finding quoted was real +; text, just read from the wrong printed office. +; +; Fixed in tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's own [split_at_alt_office] (see +; its own citation, module header point 5): every field extractor now +; reads the PRIMARY office only, cut at the "-VEL-" token before any +; field extraction runs. [te_deum] now reads [None] (unresolved) on +; these six dates -- the primary office states no "Ad Mat." of its own, +; so there is nothing to positively confirm either direction from, the +; same meaning [None] already carries elsewhere in this fixture. The +; alternative office's own Te Deum is captured, not discarded, in a new +; [alt_te_deum] field (still [true] on all six -- the extraction was +; never wrong about what the SECOND office says, only about which +; office [te_deum] itself should report). ; -; CITATION: the same n.302(b)/RG431(b) text L5 already cites (LT.txt -- -; a MISSAL rubric, not a Breviary one, so its literal text governs the -; MASS's own Gloria, not Matins' Te Deum) does not directly license this -; finding at all -- 237/238 (the BREVIARY rubric {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef. -; te_deum} actually implements) has no clause naming a commemoration as -; grounds for Te Deum. What this finding suggests, not yet established: -; the DIVINE OFFICE may treat a commemorated day more generously than the -; MASS does for exactly this shape (a commemorated saint's own lessons -; are read at Matins even on an impeded day, which could plausibly extend -; to Te Deum by an unwritten or unlocated convention) -- genuinely -; speculative, offered as a research lead for a follow-on task, not a -; citation this entry treats as settled. +; VERIFIED, not merely argued: re-extracted from the SAME pdftotext dump +; (SHA-256 of the source PDF unchanged, fixture header above). Exactly 6 +; of 400 rows changed, every one Te Deum true->unresolved, on precisely +; these six dates and no others (a hard characterisation probe in +; tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml now asserts this population is EXACTLY +; these six, not merely observed once). Gloria, Credo, class_, title and +; praef are UNCHANGED on all 400 rows, confirmed by a direct diff of the +; fixture before and after -- those fields were already correctly +; bounded to the primary office (a Vespers-line token always intervened +; before "-VEL-" on all six real instances), so this was never a +; Gloria-axis bug, consistent with F1 and with L5's own six-date subset +; agreeing with colitur throughout. ; -; WHY NOT FIXED HERE: SINGLE-WITNESSED (the LMS fixtures never captured -; Te Deum at all, so there is no second Ordo to corroborate this shape -; the way the Sacred-Triduum/BVM-Saturday/vigil findings elsewhere in -; this task were cross-checked). Fixing it would need the SAME kernel -; signature widening L5 already declines for the identical reason -; (`~commemorations` on {!Colitur_kernel.Rite.t.gloria}, and by extension -; a parallel widening of [te_deum] if the two were ever to diverge in -; their own inputs) -- out of a task briefed to follow creed's existing -; seam exactly. Left OPEN for the same follow-on task L5 recommends. +; VERDICT: colitur correct; the LMS Ordo (L5) and the FIUV Ordo's own +; "-VEL-" alternative both, correctly, describe the SAME Cum-Sanctissima +; calendar colitur excludes by binding design (CLAUDE.md decision 2). +; See L5's own rewritten entry (data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp) +; for the full account, including the "-VEL-" dual printing quoted there +; as the decisive evidence for BOTH entries. NOT an active +; machine-checked [id] entry, matching this file's own F1/F2/F4 +; precedent -- the real enforcement was test_fiuv_ordo.ml's own +; [is_f3_lenten_commemoration] predicate and [f3_count] assertion, BOTH +; REMOVED (same task): with the extractor fixed, this shape produces no +; mismatch at all any more (matched by the general [None]-skips- +; comparison branch every other unresolved-Te-Deum row already uses), +; so a dedicated predicate/count pin would be dead code -- the same "an +; entry that stops firing is a real change, not silently absorbed" +; discipline data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp's own L1/L3 closures, +; and this file's own F2/F4 closure, already establish. diff --git a/data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp b/data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp index df813f9..d91028a 100644 --- a/data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp +++ b/data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp @@ -10,6 +10,11 @@ ; Gloria (RG431-432) -- both fire in more than one window, at DIFFERENT ; counts per window, so both are prose-only (L2's own precedent), not ; machine-checked [id] records; see each for the real enforcement site. +; L5 was MISADJUDICATED as "colitur's own gap" and CORRECTED +; (l5-f3-readjudication task, 2026-08-22): see L5's own entry for the +; full account -- it is an OCCURRENCE difference (the LMS Ordo follows +; the 2020 decree Cum Sanctissima, colitur excludes it by binding +; design), not a Gloria defect. ; ; A SEPARATE file from data/ef/expected-divergences.sexp (the lectio ; allow-list) and data/ef/expected-divergences-missalemeum.sexp (the @@ -233,14 +238,32 @@ (note "2023-12-24 (the 4th Sunday of Advent AND Christmas Eve, a genuinely rare coincidence -- roughly 1 year in 7 -- absent from both the 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 windows, where Christmas Eve falls on a Tuesday and a Wednesday respectively). colitur says the Creed IS said (true), reading [temporal]'s own weekday (Sunday) per RG475(a)'s clause, positioned ahead of the vigil-exclusion check in {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.creed} -- unconditionally, the same way it already does for RG16(a)'s Feast-of-the-Lord case. The Ordo says \"No Gl No Cr\" for this date. ADJUDICATED FOR COLITUR, not merely left open by default: RG30(a)'s own \"locum tenet ... nulla fit commemoratio\" language is textually closer to RG16(a) (which colitur already treats as Creed-preserving) than to an ordinary vigil superseding a Sunday -- the Vigil does not merely WIN THE DAY, it takes the SUNDAY'S OWN IDENTITY, the same shape RG475(a) was written to reach. The COUNTER-reading is real and not dismissed here: RG475(a)'s own text says \"locum cedat ... festo\" (gives way to a FEAST), and RG35 (Caput VI) classifies feria/vigilia/festum as three distinct liturgical-day categories -- a strict textual reading could confine 475(a)'s override to FEAST-displacement only, leaving a VIGIL-displaced Sunday to fall through to the general vigil exclusion (476, via RG33's own \"a vigil is a distinct category\" reasoning already coded elsewhere in {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.creed}). Left OPEN rather than closed on this task's own authority: adjudicating scripture-grade primary-source questions is out of scope for a witness-wiring task, and the two readings are both defensible. Not fixable inside this task's own no-lib-changes constraint regardless of which reading eventually wins.") (expected_rows 1)) -; L5 -- OPEN, colitur's own gap, found extending this suite to the Gloria -; axis (celebrant-rubrics-phase1 Phase 2, 2026-08-22). NOT an active -; machine-checked [id] entry -- same reasoning L2 above gives: the count -; varies window to window (5 in 2023-2024, 5 in 2024-2025, 6 in -; 2025-2026), so a single static [expected_rows] cannot check it. The REAL -; enforcement is test_lms_ordo.ml's own [is_l5_lenten_commemoration] +; L5 -- MISADJUDICATED, NOW CORRECTED (l5-f3-readjudication task, +; 2026-08-22). This entry previously read "OPEN, colitur's own gap" -- +; WRONG, on two independent grounds (below). It is NOT a Gloria defect +; of colitur's. It is NOT a rubric dispute at all: it is an OCCURRENCE +; difference, because the LMS Ordo is compiled to the 2020 decree Cum +; Sanctissima (its own introduction says so, docs/research/ordo/ +; PROVENANCE-lms.md) and colitur excludes that decree from its 1962 core +; by BINDING DESIGN (CLAUDE.md decision 2: "Every addition [2020 Quo +; Magis/Cum Sanctissima, any community's proper] is an overlay, never +; core"). On these 16 dates colitur and the LMS Ordo each correctly +; describe a DIFFERENT, both genuine, calendar -- they were never +; disagreeing about the same one. VERDICT: colitur correct. NOT an +; active machine-checked [id] entry -- same reasoning L2 above gives: +; the count varies window to window (5 in 2023-2024, 5 in 2024-2025, 6 +; in 2025-2026), so a single static [expected_rows] cannot check it. The +; REAL enforcement is test_lms_ordo.ml's own [is_l5_lenten_commemoration] ; predicate plus [make_suite]'s own ~expected_gloria_l5 parameter, -; asserted per window directly. +; asserted per window directly -- KEPT, unlike a bug-driven divergence +; that stops firing once fixed (data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp's +; own F3, closed by this same task, is that other shape): this one is +; EXPECTED TO RECUR IN EVERY FUTURE WINDOW, because the exclusion it +; reflects is a standing design decision, not a defect to remove. +; +; THE ORIGINAL, SUPERSEDED HYPOTHESIS -- preserved below verbatim, the +; same "retain the wrong reading and say why it was wrong" convention +; L3's and F1's own history in this file already establish, NOT deleted: ; ; SHAPE, identical in all 16 instances found (5+5+6, zero exceptions): ; a privileged Lenten or Passiontide feria (Class3, violet -- RG25, @@ -251,6 +274,8 @@ ; day is a plain ferial office by every test [Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.te_deum] ; runs -- no Sunday, no vigil, no octave, [named] = [None], [subject] = ; [Temporal]); the Ordo reads [true] in every one of the 16 instances. +; (This description of the SHAPE is still accurate -- what was wrong is +; the CONCLUSION drawn from it, below.) ; ; CITATION (docs/research/LT.txt:2359-2361, "V - De Missis festivis", ; quoted in rubrics_ef.ml's own [gloria] header in full): "302. Sensu @@ -263,7 +288,9 @@ ; ferial Office, carrying a commemoration, is elevated to "festive" status ; for the Gloria specifically. ; -; WHY NOT FIXED HERE: n.303(b), the very next paragraph (LT.txt:2359-2367, +; WHY NOT FIXED HERE (the original text, which already quoted the very +; clause that defeats its own hypothesis, below, but did not follow it +; to its conclusion): n.303(b), the very next paragraph (LT.txt:2359-2367, ; same quote in rubrics_ef.ml), qualifies n.302(b)'s own Masses: "dici ; potest tantum si occurrit dies liturgicus IV classis" -- CAN ONLY BE ; SAID if the liturgical day occurring is IV class. Every instance found @@ -273,29 +300,29 @@ ; project's sources), which may clarify that 301-303 govern which Mass a ; priest may freely CHOOSE among several options in one church on one day ; (a dimension colitur does not model -- see [gloria]'s own SCOPE NOTE), -; a different question from \"does THE Mass actually said, once -; determined, say the Gloria\" (431(b)'s own question). Implementing this +; a different question from "does THE Mass actually said, once +; determined, say the Gloria" (431(b)'s own question). Implementing this ; also has a real architectural cost this task's own instructions ; explicitly avoided: [Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.gloria] would need a FOURTH ; parameter, the day's own {!Colitur_kernel.Liturgical_day.t.commemorations} ; -- a kernel [Rite.t.gloria] signature change, the same shape RG16(a)'s ; own [admit] fix needed a [~temporal] parameter for, and squarely out of -; a task briefed to \"follow exactly how creed was wired -- same seam\". +; a task briefed to "follow exactly how creed was wired -- same seam". ; Left OPEN, not guessed into a possibly-wrong rule. Recommended for a ; follow-on task, ideally alongside Phase 3's Preface work (RG483 governs ; a DIFFERENT, but textually adjacent, commemoration-vs-Mass-part ; question, so the two may share the same kernel signature widening). ; -; UPDATE (same task, after wiring the FIUV Ordo's own Gloria and Te Deum -; axes, test_fiuv_ordo.ml): this paragraph previously said FIUV's own -; [gloria] axis was not compared at all. It now is, and the result +; UPDATE (same original task, after wiring the FIUV Ordo's own Gloria and +; Te Deum axes, test_fiuv_ordo.ml): this paragraph previously said FIUV's +; own [gloria] axis was not compared at all. It now is, and the result ; WEAKENS this entry's own case rather than strengthening it: FIUV's own ; [gloria] is [false] on all six of these exact dates in its window -- ; AGREEING WITH COLITUR, DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING the LMS Ordo's [true] -; above. So this is not \"colitur has a corroborated gap\", it is \"two +; above. So this is not "colitur has a corroborated gap", it is "two ; independent Ordos disagree with EACH OTHER on Gloria for this shape, ; and colitur happens to agree with the universal one, not the diocesan -; one\". What FIUV's OWN Te Deum axis DOES show for the identical six +; one". What FIUV's OWN Te Deum axis DOES show for the identical six ; dates: [true] -- Te Deum, unlike Gloria, genuinely IS said at Matins on ; these days (data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp's own F3), a real, ; single-witness finding that this entry's own n.302(b)/431(b) citation @@ -303,8 +330,85 @@ ; mean L5 itself is answering the wrong question, not merely open. ; Genuinely uncertain which of the two Mass-Gloria witnesses (LMS or ; FIUV) is right for this shape; left OPEN, not adjudicated either way, -; for a follow-on task with more primary-source access than this one -; had. +; for a follow-on task with more primary-source access than this one had. +; (CORRECTED, l5-f3-readjudication task: F3's own "single-witness +; finding" was never a Te Deum finding at all -- it was +; tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml reading the WRONG PRINTED OFFICE, see below. +; There was no Office-vs-Mass question to be uncertain about.) +; +; THE CORRECTION, in full (l5-f3-readjudication task, 2026-08-22): +; +; 1. RG303(b) ALREADY DEFEATS the n.302(b)/431(b) hypothesis on its own +; terms -- the original text above quoted it but stopped short of the +; conclusion. Quoted again, in full, because it is the load-bearing +; sentence: "dici potest tantum si occurrit dies liturgicus IV +; classis" -- [a Mass "of a commemoration occurring in the day's own +; Office"] MAY BE SAID ONLY IF the liturgical day occurring is FOURTH +; class. A privileged Lenten or Passiontide feria is THIRD class +; (RG25) -- every one of these 16 instances. So n.302(b) is +; PROHIBITED, not merely inapplicable, on precisely the days this +; entry covers, and 431(b)'s own Gloria elevation, which depends on +; 302(b), can never reach them. Not "unresolved without n.304" as the +; original text guessed: 303(b) alone already closes the question, +; the wrong way for the original hypothesis. +; +; 2. THE FIUV ORDO PRINTS BOTH OPTIONS, and this is decisive on its own, +; independent of (1). All 16 LMS dates are Lenten/Passiontide +; privileged ferias; six of them fall inside the FIUV fixture's own +; 2025-2026 window (2026-03-06/07/09/12/21/24 -- the same six F3 +; named). For every one of the six, the raw FIUV source (verified +; directly against a fresh pdftotext -layout dump, not merely the +; fixture) prints TWO complete readings for the SAME civil date, +; separated by a literal "-VEL-" ("or") token. 24 March 2026, in +; full: +; +; 24. Viol Feria III post Dom. I Passionis, De ea, III cl. - Off. feriale temp. Passionis. +; Ad LAUDES ... comm. S Gabrielis Archangeli. +; Missa pr., (omittuntur ps. Iudica me et Gloria Patri), sine Gloria, comm. S +; Gabrielis Archangeli, sine Credo, praef. de Sancta Cruce or. super populum. +; I VESPERAE de seq., comm. huius diei. - Compl. de dom. +; -VEL- +; Feria III. S Gabrielis Archangeli, III cl. (Priv.) - Off. ordinarium. - Ad Mat. +; Ll. 1a et 2a (= 2a + 3a) de Scr. occ., 3a de festo, Te Deum. - Ad LAUDES comm. +; Feriae. +; Missa pr., Gloria, comm. Feriae, tractus, sine Credo, praef. de Sancta Cruce vel +; de Angelis. +; +; The FIRST option is strict 1962: the feria wins, "sine Gloria", no +; Te Deum stated, the saint merely commemorated -- EXACTLY colitur's +; own answer, field for field. The SECOND, after "-VEL-", is the +; Cum-Sanctissima-elevated option: the saint's own feast, "Off. +; ordinarium", Gloria, Te Deum, the feria commemorated instead -- +; EXACTLY the LMS Ordo's own answer. The FIUV Ordo's own title page +; states the convention this book uses throughout for exactly this +; distinction (N.B., page 1, verified directly against the PDF): +; "days of the third class to which the norms of the decree Cum +; santissima [sic] apply are marked 'III cl.' ... but days ... to +; which these norms do not apply are marked 'III cl. (Priv.)'." One +; document, compiled by a THIRD party independent of both colitur's +; own lineage and the LMS, prints BOTH engines' own answers side by +; side as two legitimate readings of two different calendars. There +; is no dispute left to adjudicate. +; +; So the Gloria and Te Deum RULES were never in dispute at all: each +; engine's answer follows correctly from its own occurrence result, on +; its own calendar. What this entry originally described as "colitur's +; own gap" is colitur correctly implementing the 1962 core it was built +; to implement, diverging from a printed book that, by its own +; introduction, deliberately implements something else. +; +; NOTE ALSO (so a reader arriving here from +; data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp's own F3 does not draw the +; wrong conclusion from that entry's own closure): F3 did NOT +; "corroborate" or "contradict" L5 at any point in this history. Both +; were the same underlying fact read two different ways, and F3's own +; apparent Te Deum-true reading was never a real second data point in +; the first place -- it was tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's own +; [extract_te_deum] silently reading the SECOND ("-VEL-") office's own +; Te Deum instead of the primary's, on exactly these six dates, closed +; by fixing the extractor (tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's own +; [split_at_alt_office]), not by resolving any Office-vs-Mass question. +; See F3's own entry for the full account. ; L6 -- OPEN, root-caused to a DIFFERENT, PRE-EXISTING bug this Gloria ; comparison merely surfaced, not a Gloria defect itself. Fired once, |