Dylan
342a8f8382
One file per feature, in the v2 shape that worked: goal, context, design, implementation, acceptance criteria, tests, risks, out of scope -- written before implementing so the risks are on paper rather than walked into. Three carry more weight than their size suggests. V3-01 ships the port's first real migration, and since the destructive fallback is gone, getting addColumn and a v1-database test right matters more than the feature. V3-08 forces a routing-engine decision with ongoing cost, so it sits behind a RoutingService interface mirroring what LocationSource did for GPS. V3-13 is not code at all -- it answers the three questions open since v2, and V3-15 may close unbuilt as a result, which is a legitimate outcome. Several tickets record constraints that are easy to lose: no activity picker in front of Start, because the founding premise is press-and-go with gloves; the Route-to-Trip foreign key must not cascade, or deleting an old plan deletes the ride; V3-14 will deliberately break the parity harness by adding GPX <type>, and that expectation should be updated rather than the check dropped; and V3-16 must not regress the explicit text colours that exist because of the black-on-black bug. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
62 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
62 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
# V3-13 — Real-ride measurements: elevation, battery, map lifecycle
|
|
|
|
**Phase** Quality · **Depends on** the real-ride checklist · **Size** M · **Status** Blocked on riding
|
|
|
|
## Goal
|
|
Answer three questions that no amount of code can answer, then act on the answers.
|
|
|
|
## Context
|
|
Three items have been carried since v2 because **nothing but a real ride settles them**.
|
|
Grouped into one ticket because they share a prerequisite: riding, with instruments.
|
|
|
|
## The three questions
|
|
|
|
### 1. Is elevation gain actually wrong?
|
|
~30 m of phantom gain per ten stationary minutes against **synthetic ±8 m uniform noise**.
|
|
Real GPS altitude error is *correlated* — it wanders rather than jitters — so the true
|
|
behaviour is unknown.
|
|
|
|
**Do not tune this blind.** Record a flat ride and see what it reports. Only then consider
|
|
a longer smoothing window, a larger threshold, or the barometer — which most phones have
|
|
and which is far more accurate than GPS altitude.
|
|
|
|
The port has an advantage the native app did not: `tool/parity/run.sh` proves the algorithm
|
|
is bit-identical to the Kotlin original, so any change can be measured against a known
|
|
baseline rather than guessed at.
|
|
|
|
### 2. What does it actually cost in battery?
|
|
Never measured, on either app. And V3-04/V3-05 make it worse: a lit screen and continuous
|
|
map rendering are a different order of cost from a background service.
|
|
|
|
Measure three configurations over a multi-hour ride: pocketed with no map, pocketed with
|
|
the live map on, and mounted with the screen awake.
|
|
|
|
### 3. Does the map leak?
|
|
`flutter_map`'s lifecycle was wired carefully but never leak-tested across repeated
|
|
navigation. The native repo flagged the osmdroid equivalent as a known hazard.
|
|
|
|
## Implementation
|
|
1. Run the checklist in [../port/REAL-RIDE-CHECKLIST.md](../port/REAL-RIDE-CHECKLIST.md)
|
|
2. Record elevation on a known-flat route; compare against a barometric or surveyed source
|
|
3. Battery: note the percentage at start and end for each configuration, with duration
|
|
4. Memory: navigate rides → detail → back fifty times with DevTools attached, watching
|
|
for monotonic growth
|
|
5. **Write the numbers into this file.** The point is a record, not a vibe.
|
|
|
|
## Acceptance criteria
|
|
- [ ] Flat-ride elevation gain recorded, with a verdict: acceptable or not
|
|
- [ ] Battery cost per hour recorded for all three configurations
|
|
- [ ] Memory across fifty navigations recorded, with a leak verdict
|
|
- [ ] Any resulting code change is justified by a number written down here
|
|
|
|
## Tests
|
|
Measurement, not tests. Any fix that follows gets its own regression test, and elevation
|
|
changes must be re-checked against the parity harness.
|
|
|
|
## Risks
|
|
The temptation to tune elevation on a hunch. The v2 backlog says do not, twice, and the
|
|
existing bound was already shown to pass on seed luck.
|
|
|
|
## Out of scope
|
|
Fixes themselves. This ticket produces evidence; the fixes are separate work.
|