fix(ark): stop telling users an exit finishes while the app is closed - #209
Open
CypherBoxLLC wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
fix(ark): stop telling users an exit finishes while the app is closed#209CypherBoxLLC wants to merge 1 commit into
CypherBoxLLC wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Three user-facing strings claimed the funds sweep automatically once the timelock expires. They do not. The drive that broadcasts each exit tree level and fires the claim is foreground-only, and the one background entry point deliberately bails while an exit is active. Measured on a 44-hour mainnet exit against a dead ASP: every stretch the app spent closed produced zero progress on capsules still broadcasting, and the final claim landed only because the app was open at the right block. A user who read this copy and closed the app got a stalled exit and no signal. The replacement states the actual contract: it is publishing now, it does not progress while closed, reopen after the timelock to collect. It deliberately does NOT promise a notification, because nothing schedules one yet; promising that would swap one false claim for another. Also drops an em dash that was sitting in shipped UI copy. Copy is a draft for the product owner to rewrite. The intent is the constraint, not the wording.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes the copy half of #196.
What was wrong
Three user-facing strings promised the exit completes on its own:
None of that is true.
progressArkExits,syncArkExitsandclaimArkExitsToAddressare reached only fromuseArkSync, a foreground React hook, and the one background entry point bails deliberately while an exit is active.Measured, not argued
From the 44-hour mainnet exit against a deliberately dead ASP:
AwaitingDeltaadvanced normally, because the chain does that partA user who read the old copy and closed the app got a stalled exit and no signal that anything was wrong.
What it says now
The actual contract: it is publishing now, it does not progress while closed, reopen after the timelock to collect.
It deliberately does not promise a notification. Nothing schedules one yet, that is #199, and promising it here would replace one false claim with another.
Also removes an em dash that was sitting in shipped UI copy.
Wording
Draft, expected to be rewritten. The intent is the constraint, not the words.
Verification
tsc --noEmit: 400, matching the post-Land 23 device-tested fixes as one bundle: exit, refresh, vault, chain source #208 baseline onmainnpx jest -i tests/unit --rootDir .: 52 suites, 546 passed, 1 skippedOne earlier run in bail mode reported a single failure, but bail truncated the output before naming the test and it did not reproduce across two subsequent full runs. Recording it rather than hiding it.
Copy-only, no logic touched. Not device-verified yet.
Not closed by this
#196 also asks for a notification (tracked as #199) and for opportunistic background execution, which that issue itself says must never be relied on. This PR addresses the part that was actively misleading users.