RunicGateway/docs
3
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge pull request 'docs(website): record the landed route manifest and resequence CSP after PR 0' (#49) from chore/route-manifest into main

Browse Source 
Reviewed-on: #49
Reviewed-by: Colby Whitlock <whitlocktech@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
Colby Whitlock
2026-07-27 20:00:08 +00:00
parent 40cd9375d7 b1a474a7eb
commit 9ecfe610de
2 changed files with 69 additions and 4 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

39
website/API_V2_PLAN.md
View File

@@ -261,7 +261,30 @@ Because the auth model is untouched and the URLs are frozen, each PR is a **pure
with a green test suite and a zero-diff route manifest as its acceptance criteria** — which is what
makes grouped PRs actually reviewable.
### PR 0 — the route manifest (prerequisite of the first split PR)
### PR 0 — the route manifest (prerequisite of the first split PR) — **landed**
> **Status: shipped.** `server/scripts/routeManifest.js` + `npm run routes:manifest`,
> `server/routes.manifest.json` (199 public + 2 internal), `server/routes.guards.json`,
> `server/test/routeManifest.test.js`, and a `routes:manifest -- --check` step in
> `.gitea/workflows/pr-checks.yml`. No router file moved. **The generator reproduced
> `api-route-inventory.json` byte-for-byte on first run**, so the freeze is in effect and the
> committed baseline is confirmed accurate rather than merely asserted.
>
> Two deviations from the design below, both deliberate:
>
> - **The unauthenticated-status snapshot was tried and dropped**, exactly as this section allowed.
> Firing unauthenticated GETs at every manifest path against the dead-port mariadb pool the tests
> use does not fail fast — the pool sits on its acquire timeout, and a partial sweep had not
> finished after two minutes. A flaky two-minute gate is worse than none. What replaced it is
> cheap and deterministic: the test suite asserts from the introspected stack that every
> `/api/v1/admin/**` and `/api/v1/player/**` route still carries `requireAuth`.
> - **`routes.guards.json` is committed and staleness-checked**, though a diff in it is explicitly
> *not* a contract change. Left ungenerated it would rot into a misleading review aid within a
> release. The gate is on freshness; the meaning of a guards diff is still "read this", not
> "justify this". The generator drops app-level plumbing (helmet, morgan, the JSON parser, the bot
> guard) since it applies uniformly to all 199 routes and would bury the per-route gates.
"Every URL is unchanged" must be *proved by a diff*, not asserted in review. PR 0 lands the tool that
proves it, with no router file moved.
@@ -309,9 +332,17 @@ proves it, with no router file moved.
CSP and the split are independent; the only hard ordering is PR 0 before the first split PR.
1. **PR — CSP report-only.** Tightened policy behind `Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only` + `report-to`.
2. **PR — CSP enforce.** One release later, assuming a clean violation report.
3. **PR 0 — route manifest.** Generator + CI check + committed baseline of today's surface. No routers moved.
**Resequenced during implementation: PR 0 ships first, before the CSP pair.** The CSP report-only PR
has to stand up a violation collector (`POST /api/csp-report`) for `report-to` to point at — which is
a new URL under `/api/**`. Landing it first would mean PR 0's generator emitting 200 routes against a
199-route committed baseline, so PR 0 could no longer prove itself by reproducing
`api-route-inventory.json` byte-for-byte. With PR 0 first, the collector shows up as a reviewed,
deliberate `+1` in the manifest — which is exactly the mechanism working as designed.
1. **PR 0 — route manifest.** Generator + CI check + committed baseline of today's surface. No routers moved. ✅ landed
2. **PR — CSP report-only.** Tightened policy behind `Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only` + `report-to`,
plus the report collector (manifest `+1`).
3. **PR — CSP enforce.** One release later, assuming a clean violation report.
4. **PR 1 — admin:** `users`, `account`, `invites`, `auth` (providers).
5. **PR 2 — admin:** `moderation`, `bot-activity`, `activity`.
6. **PR 3 — admin (content):** `posts`, `pages`, `wiki`, `uploads`.

34
website/BACKEND_DESIGN.md
View File

@@ -33,6 +33,12 @@ Skeleton from the spec, with a small number of justified additions marked **(+)*
> 110 routes) are being split into one router file per business capability — **in place, with every
> URL unchanged**. This section and §4 get updated as each split PR lands. See
> [API_V2_PLAN.md](./API_V2_PLAN.md) § Phase 2.
>
> "Every URL unchanged" is enforced mechanically, not by review: `server/scripts/routeManifest.js`
> (`npm run routes:manifest`) walks the live Express stack and writes the sorted
> `{ method, path }` freeze to `server/routes.manifest.json`, mirrored here as
> [api-route-inventory.json](./api-route-inventory.json). PR checks regenerate it and fail on any
> diff, so a split PR that moves a URL cannot merge silently. See § 4.0.
```
server/
@@ -257,6 +263,34 @@ marker. Cleared wholesale on TOTP disable / password change / password reset.
Base path `/api/v1`. JSON in/out. Auth via httpOnly cookie (`isLoggedIn` reads it; also
accepts `Authorization: Bearer` for API testing).
### 4.0 The authoritative route list
The prose tables below are **orientation for a human reader** and can drift. Two generated artifacts
are authoritative, and they answer different questions:
| Artifact | Source of truth for | Generated by |
|---|---|---|
| `server/routes.manifest.json` — mirrored as [api-route-inventory.json](./api-route-inventory.json) | **What URLs exist.** 199 public routes + 2 on the internal listener, sorted, method + path only. | `npm run routes:manifest`, by walking the live Express stack |
| `server/swagger/swagger-output.json` — served at `/api/docs` | **What each route means.** Parameters, bodies, response codes, security. | `npm run swagger`, from `#swagger.*` annotations |
The split is deliberate: Swagger is annotation-derived, so an unannotated route is invisible in it and
it churns whenever a description is reworded — it documents *intent*. The manifest is introspection-
derived and records *reality*, which is why it, not Swagger, is the thing PR checks freeze
(`npm run routes:manifest -- --check`).
Scope: the manifest keeps `/api/**` and `/.well-known/**` from the public app plus everything on the
internal listener. The SPA catch-all, `/uploads` and `/brand` are filesystem-conditional static
mounts — not API contract, and including them would make the output depend on whether CI had built
the client.
A third generated file, `server/routes.guards.json`, is a **review aid and not a contract**: per route,
the middleware handler count plus the *named* middleware on its mount chain. It exists because a
router-level `router.use(noindex, isLoggedIn, staffOnly)` gate never appears in an individual route's
own stack, so a capability router extracted without re-applying the gate would otherwise publish
authenticated endpoints silently. Names are a hint only — `requireRole(...)` returns an anonymous
arrow and cannot be observed — but a *missing* `requireAuth` is unambiguous, and the server test suite
asserts every `/admin/**` and `/player/**` route still carries it.
### /auth (auth.routes.js → auth.controller.js)
| Method | Path | Auth | Body | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|---|