Closes#120.
The Tower and band changes panel listed every handover, newest first, growing
without bound. On a link that hands over several times a day it reads as a wall
of near-identical rows — it answers what happened, but not what the pattern is,
which is the question an operator actually has.
Dwell totals now sit above it: how long the modem has spent on each band and on
each cell, over 24 hours, 7 days or 30 days, ordered by time spent so the answer
is the first row rather than something to be worked out. Visit counts sit
alongside, because six brief stays and one long one are different situations
that share a total.
No new collection. History is already written on every change, so dwell is the
interval between consecutive events — the same reconstruction used for WiFi
roaming sessions.
Three decisions worth recording.
**The state in force when the window opened is included.** Without it, a link
that changed once yesterday would report a few minutes of dwell across seven
days, having silently dropped everything before the first change in range. The
last event *before* the window is fetched specifically to anchor that first
stretch.
**Aggregated carriers each count for the whole stretch.** A period on B1 and B3
together credits both with the full duration, so band shares describe how much of
the window each band was in use rather than dividing it between them. Totals can
exceed 100%, which is the honest description of carrier aggregation rather than a
rounding artefact.
**Absence is reported as absence.** A segment whose cell was never reported is
excluded rather than attributed to "unknown", a device with no history reads as
"no changes recorded" rather than an empty panel, and a window longer than our
records says so instead of implying the quiet period was real.
Logic lives in utils/lteDwell.ts with 17 tests. Verified end to end against
seeded history matching the reporter's own pattern: a 24-hour window covered
exactly 24 hours, B3 correctly showed 19 of them against a five-hour stretch
without it, cell totals summed to the window, and a 30-day request over 9 days of
records reported itself truncated.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Closes#112.
Source stays `docs/*.md`, rendered by MkDocs-Material and published to GitHub
Pages by Actions. Same repository on purpose: documentation drifts, and
co-location is the only thing that reliably prevents it — the pull request that
changes behaviour changes the description, and review sees both. A separate repo
would double the ceremony and guarantee divergence.
The markdown remains readable when browsing the repository, so the site renders
those files rather than replacing them.
**Versioned from the start**, using mike. Images are published to GHCR and this
project ships betas most days, so readers are routinely running something other
than the newest build; a single "latest" would confidently describe a release
they do not have. Versions follow the product rather than the docs, so the site
and the running image carry the same number.
**Content came first, and it had to.** The docs were eleven days and sixteen
releases stale — SSH keys, bulk commands, the data-cap SMS, poller health and the
timezone setting appeared in exactly zero files between them. Publishing that
would have given documentation missing five of the most consequential features a
polished, authoritative home, and a well-presented wrong answer is worse than an
obviously rough one. Four pages now cover them:
- cellular.md — signal grading, carrier aggregation, the uplink anchor,
observed bands, and the data-cap SMS including why it fires early and how to
calibrate the margin
- ssh-keys.md — leading with what installing a key costs, because RouterOS
disables password SSH for that user and the database becomes load-bearing
- commands.md — why waves exist, and why reading output matters when RouterOS
reports failure in text rather than an exit code
- scaling.md — headroom, why it is insufficient on its own, and every tunable
Pull requests build the site with `--strict`, which turns warnings into errors.
That is the point of running it there at all, and it earned itself immediately:
the first build failed on two links to the project README, which sits outside the
docs tree. They are absolute now, so they resolve both in the rendered site and
when reading the markdown on GitHub.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2GT-RichandClaude Opus 5