"Abmelden und neu registrieren" was advice that could not work. Signing out
frees nothing: the address is still held by the unique index, so registering
again with the address somebody meant fails — and every abandoned attempt
stayed in `users` for ever. Reported exactly that way, and it was right.
The button discards the account instead. Only an UNCONFIRMED one, and only
one with nothing behind it: the webhook creates a customer's login from a
paid checkout, so a user can sit on this page unconfirmed while already
having a contract, and deleting that is data loss dressed up as a
convenience. It refuses and says where to go. A confirmed account is closed,
not discarded — that is ConfirmCloseAccount, with an invoice history behind
it.
R23: confirmed in a modal. The modal mutates nothing; it dispatches the event
the page listens for, so the checks stay in the one place they already are
rather than being duplicated where they could drift.
And nothing has to be discarded by hand. clupilot:prune-unverified removes
registrations nobody confirmed after five days — long enough for somebody who
signed up on a Friday and found the mail in a spam folder on Monday, short
enough that a typo does not hold the correct address for a month. It skips a
confirmed account whatever its age, and any account with a customer record
behind it, matched on user_id AND on the address, because either link means
somebody is a customer. Every removal is logged with the address: a line that
disappears is what somebody asks about later, and a count answers nothing.
The deadline is said on the page as well as in the mail. Somebody who never
received the mail is looking at the page, and the deadline is the reason they
do not have to do anything about an attempt they abandon.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The money gate compared amount, currency and interval and left the rest to a
filter that excluded two fields. A recurring, licensed, monthly price with
transform_quantity divide_by 10, at our exact figure, on our product, carrying
our addon key passed all five conditions. Modules bill BY quantity — a pack is
one item at quantity n — so a customer holding three would have been charged
one. A tiered price was excluded only by accident: Stripe reports unit_amount
null for it and we read that as 0, which fails the amount match unless the
caller's own figure is 0, and PlanPrices::ensure() has no zero guard.
activePricesFor() now also skips a non-empty transform_quantity and any
billing_scheme other than per_unit. Absent keys stay Stripe's defaults, which
is the direction that matters: read the other way round the filter would refuse
every legitimate price and turn recognition into a permanent no-op. The
contract docblock names the four properties instead of claiming to cover all of
them, and says the list is not everything Stripe can put on a price — only
what is known to change what one charges.
And a comment that says a gap is covered is worse than the gap. The sync said a
crash between Stripe creating a product and us storing its id gives back the
same product next run: true for twenty-four hours, false afterwards, and the
exact claim this branch was written to refute. There is no recognition step for
products at all, so an interrupted run leaves an orphan and the next run past
the expiry mints a second one — worse than a duplicate price, because
activePricesFor() then looks at the wrong product and recognition goes blind
for the whole family. Written down as a known gap at both createProduct call
sites, with the trade this branch chose: folding name and metadata into the key
means a renamed family now mints a second product where it used to answer 400,
and a blockade reaches a paying customer while a duplicate product does not.
The sweep no longer reports "created" for what it adopted — the count is taken
before ensure() runs, and telling those two apart is the whole point.
The test named after 2026-07-29 could not reproduce it: the fake's key ledger
was empty, so createPrice() could not have thrown and the test could not tell
"adoption prevented the 400" from "no 400 was possible". Seeded now with the
key today's call sends and a fingerprint over the metadata the pre-9da1358 call
sent. Remove the adopt() call from AddonPrices::ensure() and the test dies with
Stripe's own sentence instead of an assertion.
Also: the plan document still instructed migrate:fresh --env=testing. There is
no .env.testing here, so it targets the live development database; struck
through with the reason, not deleted, and a Korrekturen section records the
five defects the plan's own reviews found in it. Four comments corrected —
"below" that meant above, a counter claimed unable to tie that ties with a
planted price, the unique index's second meaning for remember()'s catch, and
that MariaDB DDL is not transactional so the dedupe commits before the index.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Six tasks, each ending on a green billing folder and its own commit: the key
fingerprint (and a fake that finally reproduces Stripe's refusal), the two
listing calls, the adoption step itself, then each price service in turn, then
one row per Stripe price.
The spec now names both test files. What goes on the wire is checked through
Http::fake against the real client — asserting against the fake would only prove
the fake agrees with itself, which is the mistake that let the incident through.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Re-measuring before writing found the spec's numbers had moved: seventeen
permissions now, not sixteen, because the mailbox work added mail.manage.
It also turned up something the spec did not anticipate — ConfirmsPassword
resolves the password through auth()->user(), the default guard, so all
five components using it break the moment a second guard exists. That is
now its own task.
Self-review caught two references to things that do not exist: users has
no uuid column, so the impersonation link addresses the customer instead,
and there is no layouts.guest — the auth pages use layouts.portal.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The Task 2 reviewer rewired the model to Laravel's APP_KEY-based Crypt
facade and every test stayed green. Laravel's encrypter is a container
singleton resolved once from app.key, so config()->set('app.key') never
rebuilds it and the rotation the test performed was invisible.
Replaced with a positive proof — rotating SECRETS_KEY must break
decryption — plus the APP_KEY case with forgetInstance(), which is what
makes that direction mean anything.
Seventeen models use App\Models\Concerns\HasUuid, and R11 is the reason:
URLs address records by UUID, not by integer primary key. The plan told
the implementer to hand-roll booted() instead, losing getRouteKeyName()
with it. Authoring error, corrected before the remaining tasks copy it.
The Task 1 implementer copied '// path/to/file.php' into the files
verbatim, which breaks Pint's blank_line_after_opening_tag and matches
no file in the repo. The annotation was mine; the constraint now says so
before the next seven tasks repeat it.
Self-review against the spec turned up four gaps and one latent bug in
what already ships.
The bug: Laravel 13's MailManager reads only 'scheme' when building an
SMTP transport (MailManager.php:196) — the old 'encryption' fallback is
gone — and .env carries MAIL_SCHEME=tls, which Symfony does not accept;
it knows smtp and smtps. Nothing has failed because MAIL_MAILER=log
means no connection has ever been opened. The plan stores a human-facing
tls/ssl choice and translates it where it is used, and never copies
MAIL_SCHEME through.
The gaps: the cancellation mail and the provisioning notification were
edited but not tested, secrets.manage was never proven insufficient for
the new page, and a missing SECRETS_KEY had no task making the page say
so rather than throw.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
nexxo