Yesterday's version had it the other way — everyone visible, untick to
hide. The decision from the business side is the opposite: you see your
own notes, and you tick the colleagues you also want. So note_mutes
becomes note_subscriptions and the predicate flips from `not exists` to
`exists`.
The existing rows are not carried over. The meaning inverts rather than
the sign: converting faithfully ("everyone except the muted") would write
almost the whole roster into the new table and reproduce exactly the state
the change is meant to end. Anyone opening the setting tomorrow would
think it had not taken effect. The table is a day old; what is lost is a
few ticks from trying it out.
What this costs is worth saying plainly: the silent case that could not
happen under exceptions can happen now. Do not tick a colleague and you
will not see her follow-ups — not while she is on holiday either. That is
the flip side of the decision, and it is written down in the migration
rather than discovered later.
Each note now says who wrote it. Own notes read "von mir" rather than
repeating your own name, which would sit on every second line and tell
nobody anything. The flag is computed on the server: the user id is
already there, and threading it through four components for one word is a
poor trade. The counter on the button follows the same turn — "+2" for
what you added, nothing when you added nothing.
Verified: 21 tests, five mutation-checked (restoring `not exists`,
dropping the own-notes clause, inverting the default, hiding the author,
and printing your own name instead of "von mir" each turn them red). 489
tests, typecheck, lint, schema drift and build clean. The migration is
reviewed but not run — no reachable database here.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The bell is a shared pile: every active HR person sees every open note,
regardless of who wrote it. That was agreed and it stays the default —
this narrows it, it never widens it. You can now untick colleagues whose
notes you do not want to see.
What gets stored is the *exceptions*, not the selection. The difference
shows the day someone new joins HR: had the selection been stored, she
would be invisible to everyone until each person ticked her, and nobody
would notice her follow-ups piling up. This way she is visible from day
one and hiding her is a deliberate act. Same reasoning that made notes a
shared inbox in the first place — the silent gap is worse than a row too
many.
Own notes always come through: `note_mutes` rejects a self-reference, and
the predicate says so again rather than depending on a check constraint
staying put. Notes with no author come through too — hiding one because
nobody knows who wrote it is exactly the loss this list exists to prevent.
The rule lives in lib/notes.ts as one SQL expression because two places
need it: the bell in the header and the "Anstehend" card on the dashboard.
Two copies drift, and then the card counts something the bell does not
show.
No SQL function and no audit row, unlike anything that touches employee
data — this is a personal display preference, and an audit trail recording
every tick would make finding real changes harder. Same pattern as saved
reports and hire drafts, and the owner policy on note_mutes means a row
for someone else cannot be written even with invented values.
The checkbox flips immediately and flips back if saving fails; the list
gets clicked through several at a time and a round trip per tick feels
like hesitation.
Verified: 19 tests, five mutation-checked (or→and, dropping the own-notes
clause, inverting `not exists`, inverting the default, and losing the
email fallback each turn them red). Typecheck, lint, schema drift, 477
tests and the build are clean. Not seen in a browser: login goes through
the company account and the database is unreachable — the migration is
reviewed but has not been run.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
