1.8 KiB
Prompt
After committing the owned WireGuard interface lifecycle, the human asked to continue with the next established incremental step.
Response summary
Added a WG-specific composition context which owns one declared bindspace and an ordered interface stack. It snapshots caller-owned layer order before checkpointing, enters interfaces outermost-first, and guarantees inside-out interface teardown before bindspace release. Its inbound type shows the (WGTunnelSpec, WGInterfaceConfig) pairing directly, and its docstring depicts the stack and unwind order.
Files changed
tractor/discovery/_tunnel.py- bindspace/interface stack driver.tractor/discovery/__init__.py- public layer and driver exports.tests/discovery/test_wg_iface_lifecycle.py- mutable-input, cancellation and nested teardown-order coverage.ai/tpt-backends/03_wg_tunnel_bindspace.md- implemented composition and ownership-order contract.
Human edits
The human accepted and committed the preceding reviewed lifecycle boundary, then explicitly requested the next step. That selected the previously established bindspace/WireGuard composition boundary. In staged review, the human requested an explicit interface-stack analogy and a small ASCII diagram explaining entry and exit order. The human then identified WGInterfaceLayer as an unnecessary single-use alias which obscured the inbound tuple shape. The agent applied both human-directed edits. The human accepted the fake lifecycle test as a focused control-flow check which avoids pyroute2 overhead, while noting their general preference for end-to-end coverage. No direct manual source edits were observed.