data/opus-16.jsonl

{"prompt": "- 3d finite volume solver, structured grid\n- currently openmp only, 40 min per run on 32 cores\n- want cuda for the flux kernel first, then the pressure solve\n- must reproduce the existing results bitwise-ish (within 1e-10)\n- and we need it to still build without cuda for the laptops\n\nplan this out before any kernels get written", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "cuda kernel for the flux computation, coalesced access on the halo layout we have, and a host fallback that shares the same math", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the cfl number is hardcoded 0.9 in three files", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.2, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our array indexing is done with raw macros that differ between the solver and the io code. one indexing abstraction, identical numerical output", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "results diverge from the reference after 2000 timesteps but only with -ffast-math on, which i know is the answer but i need to know WHERE", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "walk me through the halo exchange, i want to know if the mpi calls are actually overlapping with compute or just pretending to", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "numerical methods doc for the solver — the discretization, boundary conditions, and the stability constraints, in enough detail that a new phd student can follow", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "checkpoint/restart with hdf5, one file per run not per rank, and restart must be bit-identical to a continuous run", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "visualization frontend for the solver output: slice viewer, colormap picker, and a time slider that streams frames", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the colormap is jet, please anything but jet", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.2, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "restart from a checkpoint gives slightly different results than a continuous run, about 1e-7 after 100 steps", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "map out the plan for running our solver on the cluster's slurm queue — job scripts, sizing, and how we collect results without filling the home directory", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "shopify app: webhook handler for order/create that syncs into our system, with hmac verification and the 5 second response budget respected", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our app embeds an admin ui in the shopify iframe and the modal breaks out of it on mobile", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the api version in our client is 2024-01, move to the current one", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "we hit the shopify rate limit during a sync and just fail. plan the proper approach — bulk operations, the leaky bucket, and where we queue", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "webhooks arrive out of order and we occasionally persist an older order state over a newer one", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "explain how our app handles a merchant uninstalling and reinstalling — what state survives and what shouldn't", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "app listing copy for the shopify store plus the setup instructions merchants see after install", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our three integrations (shopify, woo, bigcommerce) each have their own order normalization with different field mappings. one canonical order model, and prove the existing orders map identically", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "wpf: the settings dialog needs to be resizable with the tree on the left keeping its width, and it must remember size and position", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the app doesn't respect per-monitor dpi so it's blurry when you drag it to the second screen", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "installer doesn't create a start menu shortcut", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.2, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "check the .net app for anywhere we're blocking the ui thread on io, i suspect the file dialogs and the update check", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "back at it", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "vague-eval", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "…so the licensing thing. we sell perpetual licenses with a year of updates, plus site licenses, plus academic. currently it's a signed file the app checks at startup and it's been cracked twice. i want the design for something better that still works fully offline for our air-gapped customers. and the migration for the 4000 existing licenses", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "license verification with an offline-capable signed token, machine binding that survives a hardware upgrade, and a grace period on clock skew", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "license status pane: what edition, seats used, expiry, and a manual activation flow with a copy-paste request code", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "expired licenses show 'Invalid license' rather than saying it expired and when", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.2, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the license check happens in 12 places with slightly different rules, one of which just returns true in a debug branch. one check", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "some customers' licenses stop validating after a windows update, specifically after a motherboard driver change i think", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "assess our license enforcement honestly — how much effort is it to bypass, and which of our protections are theatre", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "licensing docs for customers: activation, moving to a new machine, offline activation, and the site license rules", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "license server endpoints for activation, deactivation and seat counting, with an audit of every activation", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "admin view for a customer's licenses: seats, activations with machine names, and a force-deactivate", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the seat count includes deactivated machines", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plan the subscription option alongside perpetual, without turning the licensing code into a maze", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "activations occasionally count double, and the customer runs out of seats", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "explain what happens on our side if a customer's clock is set two years forward", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "internal doc on the license token format and the signing key handling, for the two of us who maintain it", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "auto-update for the windows app with a delta download, signature verification, and a rollback if the new version crashes on launch", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "update prompt that doesn't interrupt a long-running computation, and offers 'install on exit'", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the updater runs as admin and writes to a user-writable temp path first", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plan the cuda port and then write the first kernel", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": "backendImpl", "mixed": true, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "mixed", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "figure out why restart isn't bit-identical then document the numerics caveat", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": "writing", "mixed": true, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "mixed", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "same but for windows", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "vague-eval", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "pasted the compiler output, this is after i tried to templatize the field class:\n\nsrc/solver/field.hpp:88:34: error: no matching function for call to 'apply_stencil'\n   88 |         return apply_stencil(f, s, halo_);\n      |                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~\nsrc/solver/stencil.hpp:41:5: note: candidate template ignored: deduced conflicting types for parameter 'T' ('double' vs 'float')\n   41 |     T apply_stencil(const Field<T,3>& f, const Stencil<T>& s, int halo);\n      |     ^\nsrc/solver/stencil.hpp:52:5: note: candidate function template not viable: requires 4 arguments, but 3 were provided\n\nsrc/solver/field.hpp:120:20: error: 'value_type' is not a member of 'Field<float, 3>'\n  120 |     using scalar = Field<float,3>::value_type;\n      |                    ^\n\n2 errors generated.\n\nim clearly holding templates wrong. i want mixed precision to work — float for the transport, double for the pressure solve", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "pasted-context", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "make the field and stencil types precision-generic properly, and confirm the double-precision path produces identical results to today", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "mixed precision transport step: float storage, double accumulation, with a compile-time switch to go all-double", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the -O3 build uses -march=native which breaks on the cluster's older nodes", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "figure out the plan for a regression test suite for the solver — reference outputs, tolerances per case, and runtime under 10 minutes", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "read the pressure solver's convergence criterion and tell me whether it's absolute or relative, because the comment and the code disagree", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "write the paper's methods section describing our numerical scheme and the verification cases", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "job submission gui for the cluster: pick a case, set resources, submit, and watch the log tail", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "profiling harness that runs the standard cases and reports time per kernel, comparable across commits", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "runtime regressed 20% between two commits that only touched io code", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the timing output prints in scientific notation with 12 digits", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.1, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "explain our memory layout for the field arrays and whether it's actually cache friendly for the stencil we apply", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "performance notes doc: the layout, the vectorization we rely on, and the compiler flags that matter, so nobody undoes it accidentally", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our io writes one file per rank per timestep, which is 40k files per run. move to collective io, same data recoverable", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plan how we make the solver installable for external users — cmake, dependencies, and a conda or spack package", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "python bindings for the solver so people can drive it from a notebook, with numpy arrays sharing memory not copying", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the python module segfaults when the array is not c-contiguous", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "tutorial notebook for the python bindings: load a case, run 100 steps, plot a slice", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "sigue nomás", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "vague-eval", "lang": "es"}
{"prompt": "we're building the merchant-facing analytics for our commerce app and i want the plan first. metrics: revenue, aov, conversion by traffic source, cohort retention. data comes from webhooks with gaps, merchants have up to 5 years of history, and they expect it to match shopify's own numbers exactly (they won't, and i need a story for that)", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "backfill job that pulls a merchant's historical orders via the bulk api, resumable, and reconciles against the webhook-derived data", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "analytics dashboard for merchants: four kpi tiles with sparklines, a revenue chart, and a table of top products, all responsive", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the aov tile divides by total orders including cancelled ones", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "we define 'revenue' in the dashboard sql, the export, and the email digest with three different treatments of refunds and shipping. one definition, documented, and say which numbers move", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our revenue number is 3-8% below the merchant's shopify report and the gap varies by merchant", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "read the cohort query and tell me whether a customer who orders twice in one month counts once or twice", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "metric definitions page for merchants — what each number includes and excludes, and why it may differ from their platform's report", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "weekly digest email with the merchant's numbers, a week-over-week comparison, and one insight worth reading", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the digest sends even when a merchant has zero orders, which reads as mockery", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.2, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "date range picker with presets, comparison mode, and it should say what timezone it's using because merchants ask constantly", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "numbers change depending on whether you load the dashboard before or after midnight in the merchant's timezone, which is expected, but the labels don't say so", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plan the multi-store support — one merchant with 4 storefronts wanting combined and per-store views", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "explain how our timezone handling works for aggregation — is a 'day' the store's day or utc", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "help doc about timezones in reporting, because this generates a support ticket a week", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "aggregation in the store's timezone with a per-store setting, and the historical aggregates rebuilt when a store changes theirs", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "product attribution: which product drove a first order, tracked from the landing page through checkout", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "attribution shows 'direct' for 60% of orders which can't be right", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the utm parsing drops parameters after the first ampersand", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "attribution breakdown view: sources as a bar chart, with a note about the attribution window and its limits", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our tracking script and the server-side attribution use different session definitions. align them, and quantify how attribution shifts", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "check whether our tracking script sets any cookie that would need consent in the eu", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "attribution methodology doc, honest about the limits, for merchants who ask why it differs from google's numbers", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plan the consent-aware tracking so we degrade gracefully without consent instead of just not working", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "ye go on", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "vague-eval", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "so the .net desktop app has a plugin system that loads dlls from a folder with full trust, which was fine when we had three internal plugins and is not fine now that customers write their own. i want the plan for isolating them — appdomains are gone, so assemblyloadcontext, or out-of-process, or wasm. include what breaks for existing plugins", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.9, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plugin host using AssemblyLoadContext with unload support, a versioned interface assembly, and a clean failure when a plugin targets an old contract", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plugin manager window: installed list, enable/disable, version and contract compatibility shown, and a load-error detail expander", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "a plugin that throws in its constructor takes the whole app down", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the plugin folder is under Program Files so plugins need admin to install", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our plugin interface has grown 40 members with obsolete ones still there. define a v2 contract, keep v1 working through an adapter", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "review what a malicious plugin can do to the host app and the user's machine as things stand", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plugin developer guide for the v2 contract: the interfaces, the lifecycle, threading rules, and how to debug against a local build", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "unload plugins cleanly so a developer can rebuild and reload without restarting the app", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "memory grows every time a plugin is reloaded, so something's keeping the context alive", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the reload button is enabled for plugins that don't support unloading", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "figure out the plan for signing and distributing third party plugins, including a review step we can actually staff", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "explain how our app decides a plugin is trusted today, and whether the signature is verified or just present", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plugin signing policy documentation for developers and for our support team", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our wpf views bind directly to model objects in half the app and to viewmodels in the other half. get everything behind viewmodels, no visual or behavioral change", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "settings persistence with a schema version and a migration path, replacing the current unversioned xml blob", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "settings get reset to defaults for users upgrading from 4.x", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "toolbar icons are 16px bitmaps and look terrible at 200% scaling, move to vectors", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "keyboard shortcuts don't work when focus is in the document canvas", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "release checklist for the desktop app: build, sign, notarize the mac build, smoke test matrix, and the update feed publish", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.5, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plan the plugin isolation then implement the load context", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": "backendImpl", "mixed": true, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "mixed", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "audit the plugin api and clean up the obviously dead members", "purpose": "review", "secondary": "refactor", "mixed": true, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "mixed", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "next please", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "vague-eval", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "here's the thing that came out of the customer call, pasting my notes:\n\n- they run our desktop app on 400 machines in a locked-down environment\n- no internet at all, updates come via a network share\n- they want to preconfigure settings centrally (registry or a config file, they don't care)\n- they need our app to not phone home AT ALL, including the crash reporter and the font loading\n- and they want an audit log of what users did, written to a share\n- oh and their IT wants an MSI not our current installer\n\nturn this into a plan with what's feasible this quarter", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.8, "slice": "pasted-context", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "offline mode switch that disables every outbound network call including telemetry and the update check, verifiable with a network monitor", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "msi packaging with per-machine install, admin-configurable defaults, and a silent install command line", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the crash reporter posts before the user consents", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "find every outbound network call in the app and list them with what triggers each", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "enterprise deployment guide: msi options, the policy settings, the offline update procedure, and the audit log format", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "admin policy settings read from the registry with the app's ui showing which settings are locked by policy", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "our network calls are made from 20 places with their own HttpClient instances, so there's no single place to gate them. one client, same requests", "purpose": "refactor", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the app hangs for 20 seconds on launch in an air-gapped environment, presumably a network timeout somewhere", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "user activity audit log written to a configurable path, append only, with a documented format", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the audit log path setting accepts a unc path but the writer fails silently on one", "purpose": "debugging", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "offline update via a network share: the app checks a manifest on the share, verifies signatures, and installs on next launch", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "the update manifest schema isn't documented anywhere and their IT is asking", "purpose": "writing", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "plan how we test the air-gapped configuration in CI, because we will break it otherwise", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "check whether the locked-by-policy settings can be changed by editing the config file directly", "purpose": "review", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.6, "slice": "boundary", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "font loading falls back to a web font when the local one is missing", "purpose": "quickFix", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.3, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "settings ui showing policy-locked fields as disabled with a tooltip saying who set it", "purpose": "frontendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "core", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "figure out the offline story properly then build the manifest checker", "purpose": "planning", "secondary": "backendImpl", "mixed": true, "difficulty": 0.7, "slice": "mixed", "lang": "en"}
{"prompt": "and then that other thing", "purpose": "backendImpl", "secondary": null, "mixed": false, "difficulty": 0.4, "slice": "vague-eval", "lang": "en"}