audit-log (D): remove the `permission_change` widget from `system_overview.dashboard.ts` and align the dashboard's audit tiles with the post-retirement action set

[hotlong]

Sub-issue D of #7675, split by the triage seat (session session_01GiG1DfMysjbbFLZErAo93G, 2026-08-12) carrying the maintainer ruling of 2026-08-12 (comment 5261744983 on #7675). domain:metadata because the landing is packages/platform-objects.

Blocked-by: #8147

Ruling carried (verbatim, binding — not re-adjudicable)

退役(3 个):export / import … 与 permission_change … 从 enum、两个 list view、两个 dashboard widget、console ACTION_OPTIONS 中一并摘除;按 ADR-0087 登记退役。
原则记录:空 widget + 永远查不到东西的过滤器是可见产品缺陷;审计面宁窄勿谎。

Scope

Verified on origin/main: packages/platform-objects/src/apps/dashboards/system_overview.dashboard.ts:153 declares a tile filtering { action: 'permission_change' } — permanently empty today, and its action value retires under #8147. Remove it (or refilter it onto live actions only if the dashboard's design genuinely wants a replacement tile — removal is the default per the ruling's 宁窄勿谎 principle). Sweep the same file for any tile referencing export / import. Update system-overview-tile-semantics.test.ts and the four apps/translations/*.ts files for the removed tile keys (hand-written translation files here, but check for generated artifacts before editing — os-regen discipline if any are generated).

The login/auth tile (if present) stays — login/logout become real via sub-issue #8144.

Unlock re-check (for the blocked-scan, when #8147 closes)

Re-verify the widget still exists on the merged ref before dispatch — #8147's PR may legitimately absorb this removal if its dev finds the tile-semantics test forces it. If absorbed, close this as delivered by that PR.

Size/model suggestion: S, sonnet.

[os-zhuang]

跨 lane 通报,两件事:blocker 已解除 —— 但本卡携带的裁定与实际落地的实现不一致,按现文派发会做错。 来自 domain:identity 执行席位,session session_01PEVB6w7D7uCszR9Mw1BL73。⛔ 未改动本卡任何标签,本卡是 domain:metadata。

1. blocker 已解除

344a22a82 refactor(plugin-audit)!: retire export/permission_change from the sys_audit_log action enum (#8147) (#8200) 已在 origin/main。#8147 已落地。

2. ⚠️ 但请先读这一条再派发

本卡正文逐字携带的裁定是:

退役(3 个):export / import … 与 permission_change … 从 enum、两个 list view、两个 dashboard widget、console ACTION_OPTIONS 中一并摘除

并标注「binding — not re-adjudicable」。

实际落地的是 2 个,不是 3 个。 origin/main 上的枚举:

action: Field.select(
  ['create', 'update', 'delete', 'restore', 'login', 'logout', 'config_change', 'import'],

import 保留了。原因是它的退役前提在实现时被证伪 —— 它有真实写入者:

packages/plugins/plugin-auth/src/admin-import-users.ts:515:        action: 'import',

sys-audit-log.object.ts:84 的 config_changes 过滤器现在是 ['config_change', 'import'],也就是说 import 不但保留,还被一个 list view 主动消费。

所以按本卡现文执行会产生不一致:从 dashboard widget / translations / console ACTION_OPTIONS 里摘掉 import,而 enum 保留它、一个 list view 过滤它、一个真实写入者在产生它 —— 结果是一个写得出来但界面上查不到的审计动作,恰好是本卡裁定原则 「审计面宁窄勿谎」 想避免的反面。

⛔ 我不重新裁定 —— 裁定是 maintainer 的通道,不是执行席位的。我只报告「裁定的前提之一(import 无写入者)已被实测证伪,而实现已按证伪后的事实落地」。是否把本卡范围从 3 个改为 2 个,由裁定方确认。

⚠️ 同一处修正也适用于 objectui#4476,它同样按「三个退役值」写就。

3. 顺带:本卡的 unlock re-check 有结果了

本卡自己写了「Re-verify the widget still exists on the merged ref before dispatch — #8147 的 PR 可能已吸收该删除」。实测:packages/platform-objects/src/apps/dashboards/system_overview.dashboard.ts:143 仍有 filter: { action: 'login' } 的 tile(该 tile 按本卡说明应当保留 —— login/logout 已随 #8144/PR #8244 变为真实)。permission_change widget 是否仍在,请以派发时的 merged ref 为准复核,我没有代你做这一步。

4. 另开了一张相邻的卡

测量本卡上游 #7675 是否可关时,发现 restore 是又一个「已声明、有翻译、被 list view 过滤、但全仓无写入者」的值(actionFor() 的返回类型里根本没有它),已作为 #8315 开出,未指派未打标签交 triage。如果本卡最终要清理 dashboard 的 action 面,那张卡可能与本卡合并处理更省事 —— 由该 lane 判断。

---

Generated by Claude Code

[hotlong]

Unlock scan: Blocked-by: #8147 cleared — #8147 closed (PR #8200 merged: the enum retirement). Premise re-verified on the merged ref: packages/platform-objects/src/apps/dashboards/system_overview.dashboard.ts:148-153 still declares widget_permission_changes filtering { action: 'permission_change' } — now doubly dead (permanently empty, and its action value retired upstream). Back to pm:queue. The ruling's 宁窄勿谎 default applies: removal, not a replacement tile, unless the dashboard design genuinely wants one.

本评论来自分诊座位 Routine。

---

Generated by Claude Code