fix(db): drop the stale migration-90 grandfather entry (its second file was renumbered to 0092)

[kai392]

Summary

KNOWN_MIGRATION_DUPLICATES's [90, {0090_contributor_cap_label.sql, 0090_pull_request_detail_sync_head_sha.sql}]
entry is stale: 0090_pull_request_detail_sync_head_sha.sql was later renumbered to migrations/0092_*,
so only 0090_contributor_cap_label.sql exists at 0090 today. detectMigrationCollisions only consults
the list when a number has >1 file, so this changes no behavior — but it's factually wrong about what's
grandfathered.

• Removes the [90, …] entry (check-migrations.ts imports this same constant, so both stay in lockstep).
• Updates the two tests that pin the grandfather set: migration-collisions.test.ts (keys [15,17,74,156],
  plus a new assertion that 90 is no longer grandfathered and 0090's single file is not a collision) and
  check-migrations-script.test.ts (the success summary now reports 4 grandfathered duplicates: 0015, 0017, 0074, 0156).

The four remaining entries (15, 17, 74, 156) all still reference real duplicate files at those numbers.

Test plan

• npm run db:migrations:check → 186 migrations OK — contiguous 0001..0182 (4 grandfathered duplicates: 0015, 0017, 0074, 0156)
• npx vitest run test/unit/migration-collisions.test.ts — 15/15 pass; tsc --noEmit clean
• Verified no other test/script references the old count/list (grep repo-wide)

Closes #8897

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.56%. Comparing base (3c1173e) to head (d8dba76).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9099   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   90.56%   90.56%           
=======================================
  Files          96       97    +1     
  Lines       22490    22510   +20     
  Branches     3884     3889    +5     
=======================================
+ Hits        20367    20387   +20     
  Misses       1945     1945           
  Partials      178      178           

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	100.00% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/db/migration-collisions.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-26 17:38:19 UTC}

3 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 98/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This is a straightforward correction: removes a stale grandfather entry for migration 90 (since one of its two files was renumbered to 0092, leaving only a single file at 0090) from the shared KNOWN_MIGRATION_DUPLICATES map, and updates the two tests that pin the exact grandfathered set/count. Since detectMigrationCollisions only consults the map when a number has >1 file, this is a documentation/data-accuracy fix with no behavioral change for real inputs, and the new test explicitly proves both 0090 and 0092 remain non-colliding lone entries. The change is well-scoped and the tests are grounded in the real detectMigrationCollisions guard, not fabricated.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• scripts/check-migrations.ts's header comment block (not touched by this diff) still describes 0090 as a two-file grandfathered pair with 'feat(agent-actions): auto-close a contributor's PR over the open-PR cap (#2270) #2479'/'fix(selfhost): cap historical PR file hydration and cache by head SHA #2527' reasoning — now stale relative to the shared KNOWN_MIGRATION_DUPLICATES map; worth a follow-up doc fix so the comment doesn't contradict the actual data.
• migration-collisions.ts:29-30's new inline comment is a bit verbose for a removed-entry note; a single line referencing fix(db): stale KNOWN_MIGRATION_DUPLICATES entry for migration 90 references a file that no longer exists #8897 and the renumbering would suffice.
• Update the 0090 bullet in scripts/check-migrations.ts's header comment to reflect that only 0090_contributor_cap_label.sql remains and 0092 holds the renumbered file, keeping the documentation in sync with the code as the PR description claims.

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (1 reviewer)
• ✅ Gate result — Passing (No configured blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#8897
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 127 registered-repo PR(s), 68 merged, 6 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	kai392; Gittensor profile; 127 PR(s), 6 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: minor

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The PR removes the stale [90, ...] entry from KNOWN_MIGRATION_DUPLICATES, keeps the remaining 15/17/74/156 entries intact, and adds/updates tests confirming migration 90 (and renumbered 92) are treated as single, non-colliding files while updating the dependent check-migrations-script summary test.

Review context

• Author: kai392
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, Cuda, JavaScript, Kotlin, Perl, TypeScript, Vue
• Official Gittensor activity: 127 PR(s), 6 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Keep the PR focused and include validation evidence before maintainer review.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by LoopOver, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run LoopOver review

[loopover-orb]

LoopOver approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.