checkpoint

⚒️ Generated with [Fabro](https://fabro.sh)

checkpoint.json

@@ -1,29 +1,33 @@
 {
-  "timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:35:49.176799Z",
-  "current_node": "solve",
+  "timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:35:51.495229Z",
+  "current_node": "extract_patch",
   "completed_nodes": [
     "start",
     "setup",
-    "solve"
+    "solve",
+    "extract_patch"
   ],
   "node_retries": {
+    "extract_patch": 1,
     "solve": 1,
-    "setup": 1,
-    "start": 1
+    "start": 1,
+    "setup": 1
   },
   "context_values": {
     "command.stderr": "",
     "graph.goal": "Allow ValidationErrors to equal each other when created identically\nDescription\n\t \n\t\t(last modified by kamni)\n\t \nCurrently ValidationErrors (django.core.exceptions.ValidationError) that have identical messages don't equal each other, which is counter-intuitive, and can make certain kinds of testing more complicated. Please add an __eq__ method that allows two ValidationErrors to be compared. \nIdeally, this would be more than just a simple self.messages == other.messages. It would be most helpful if the comparison were independent of the order in which errors were raised in a field or in non_field_errors.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nI probably wouldn't want to limit the comparison to an error's message but rather to its full set of attributes (message, code, params). While params is always pushed into message when iterating over the errors in an ValidationError, I believe it can be beneficial to know if the params that were put inside are the same.\n​PR",
+    "thread.solve.current_node": "extract_patch",
     "internal.retry_count.solve": 1,
+    "internal.retry_count.extract_patch": 1,
     "internal.retry_count.start": 1,
     "thread.start.current_node": "setup",
     "failure_class": "",
     "internal.node_visit_count": 1,
     "failure_signature": "",
-    "internal.thread_id": "setup",
+    "internal.thread_id": "solve",
     "thread.setup.current_node": "solve",
     "last_stage": "solve",
-    "command.output": "fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
+    "command.output": "",
     "last_response": "The trailing newline diff is just cosmetic. The meaningful change is the addition of three methods to `ValidationError`:\n\n## Summary of Changes\n\n**File**: `django/core/exceptions.py`\n\nAdded three meth",
     "response.solve": "The trailing newline diff is just cosmetic. The meaningful change is the addition of three methods to `ValidationError`:\n\n## Summary of Changes\n\n**File**: `django/core/exceptions.py`\n\nAdded three methods to the `ValidationError` class:\n\n1. **`_get_error_key()`** — Returns a hashable, order-independent representation of the error. It handles all three forms of `ValidationError`:\n   - **Single message** (has `message` attr): returns `(message, code, params)` tuple, converting dict params to a sorted tuple of items for hashability\n   - **Dict of errors** (has `error_dict` attr): returns a sorted tuple of `(field, sorted_errors)` pairs, making comparison independent of field order and error order within each field\n   - **List of errors** (has `error_list`): returns a sorted tuple of error keys, making comparison independent of error order\n\n2. **`__eq__(other)`** — Compares two `ValidationError` instances by their error keys. Returns `NotImplemented` for non-`ValidationError` comparisons (proper Python protocol).\n\n3. **`__hash__()`** — Returns the hash of the error key, ensuring that equal `ValidationError` instances have equal hashes (required Python invariant), and making them usable in sets and as dict keys.",
     "graph.rankdir": "LR",
@@ -31,8 +35,8 @@
     "internal.retry_count.setup": 1,
     "internal.fidelity": "compact",
     "outcome": "success",
-    "current.preamble": "Goal: Allow ValidationErrors to equal each other when created identically\nDescription\n\t \n\t\t(last modified by kamni)\n\t \nCurrently ValidationErrors (django.core.exceptions.ValidationError) that have identical messages don't equal each other, which is counter-intuitive, and can make certain kinds of testing more complicated. Please add an __eq__ method that allows two ValidationErrors to be compared. \nIdeally, this would be more than just a simple self.messages == other.messages. It would be most helpful if the comparison were independent of the order in which errors were raised in a field or in non_field_errors.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nI probably wouldn't want to limit the comparison to an error's message but rather to its full set of attributes (message, code, params). While params is always pushed into message when iterating over the errors in an ValidationError, I believe it can be beneficial to know if the params that were put inside are the same.\n​PR\n\n## Completed stages\n- **setup**: fail\n  - Script: `git clone https://github.com/django/django.git . && git checkout 16218c20606d8cd89c5393970c83da04598a3e04 && python -m pip install -e .`\n  - Stdout:\n    ```\n    fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n    ```\n  - Stderr: (empty)\n\n## Context\n- failure_class: deterministic\n- failure_signature: setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
-    "current_node": "solve"
+    "current.preamble": "Goal: Allow ValidationErrors to equal each other when created identically\nDescription\n\t \n\t\t(last modified by kamni)\n\t \nCurrently ValidationErrors (django.core.exceptions.ValidationError) that have identical messages don't equal each other, which is counter-intuitive, and can make certain kinds of testing more complicated. Please add an __eq__ method that allows two ValidationErrors to be compared. \nIdeally, this would be more than just a simple self.messages == other.messages. It would be most helpful if the comparison were independent of the order in which errors were raised in a field or in non_field_errors.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nI probably wouldn't want to limit the comparison to an error's message but rather to its full set of attributes (message, code, params). While params is always pushed into message when iterating over the errors in an ValidationError, I believe it can be beneficial to know if the params that were put inside are the same.\n​PR\n\n## Completed stages\n- **setup**: fail\n  - Script: `git clone https://github.com/django/django.git . && git checkout 16218c20606d8cd89c5393970c83da04598a3e04 && python -m pip install -e .`\n  - Stdout:\n    ```\n    fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n    ```\n  - Stderr: (empty)\n- **solve**: success\n  - Model: claude-opus-4-6, 19.5k tokens in / 8.9k out\n  - Files: /tmp/django-repo/django/core/exceptions.py\n",
+    "current_node": "extract_patch"
   },
   "logs": [],
   "node_outcomes": {
@@ -40,6 +44,15 @@
       "status": "success",
       "duration_ms": 0
     },
+    "extract_patch": {
+      "status": "success",
+      "context_updates": {
+        "command.output": "",
+        "command.stderr": ""
+      },
+      "notes": "Script completed: git diff",
+      "duration_ms": 86
+    },
     "solve": {
       "status": "success",
       "context_updates": {
@@ -75,13 +88,14 @@
       "duration_ms": 30
     }
   },
-  "next_node_id": "extract_patch",
+  "next_node_id": "exit",
   "loop_failure_signatures": {
     "setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.": 1
   },
   "node_visits": {
+    "extract_patch": 1,
     "solve": 1,
-    "start": 1,
-    "setup": 1
+    "setup": 1,
+    "start": 1
   }
 }

nodes/extract_patch/script_invocation.json

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+{
+  "command": "git diff",
+  "language": "shell",
+  "timeout_ms": null
+}

nodes/extract_patch/script_timing.json

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+{
+  "duration_ms": 86,
+  "exit_code": 0,
+  "timed_out": false
+}

nodes/extract_patch/status.json

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+{
+  "status": "success",
+  "notes": "Script completed: git diff",
+  "failure_reason": null,
+  "timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:35:51.494925+00:00"
+}