docs: prepare bridge ownership patch notes

[steipete]

Prepare the Unreleased notes for the helper ownership fix in #284, with contributor credit and a user-facing highlight. This is the only prepared PR that edits CHANGELOG.md; merge it after #284.

Recommend patch 0.15.3 after both PRs land and the combined main passes CI. The last release is v0.15.2. #278 remains excluded because its existing maintainer gate requires inspectable Messages inline-playback proof.

Dependency recheck found Commander 0.2.4, SQLite.swift 0.16.0, CSQLite 3.53.3, PhoneNumberKit 5.0.8, SwiftLint 0.65.1, and the pinned Actions versions current. Retain the immutable release-workflow hotfix pin: the v1 tag diverges and lacks eight commits from its history.

This PR changes release notes only. It does not tag, publish, or change the release version. Publication still requires a separate authorized release-preparation step and the signed/notarized macOS plus Linux/Homebrew workflow.

[clawsweeper]

🦞👀
ClawSweeper picked this up.

Pull request received. I will update this pull request when review starts.

ClawSweeper review complete

ClawSweeper finished reviewing this revision. The review result is being finalized.

View the workflow run.

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: needs changes before merge. Reviewed September 7, 2026, 1:20 PM ET / 17:20 UTC.

ClawSweeper review

What this changes

Adds an Unreleased highlight and contributor credit for single-owner Messages bridge operation, preserved readiness, and automatic takeover.

Merge readiness

⛔ Needs changes before merge - 1 item remains

Keep open: these focused release notes remain useful, are absent from current main, and accurately summarize the linked pending fix. The collaborator-authored PR is protected from automatic closure.

Priority: P3
Reviewed head: 8ed0e4ec02ddc63a28087bb5e4d2db31f18e0a73

Review scores

Measure	Result	What it means
Overall readiness	🐚 platinum hermit (4/6)	A focused, convention-consistent changelog update with no actionable patch defects.
Proof confidence	🌊 off-meta tidepool	Not applicable: This collaborator-authored PR changes only release-note prose; bridge runtime proof belongs to the separate implementation review.
Patch quality	🐚 platinum hermit (4/6)	No actionable review findings were identified.

Verification

Check	Result	Evidence
Real behavior	Not applicable	Not applicable: This collaborator-authored PR changes only release-note prose; bridge runtime proof belongs to the separate implementation review.
Evidence reviewed	7 items	Exact introduced change: The pinned base-to-head diff adds four lines only to CHANGELOG.md; no runtime, dependency, workflow, version, or permission changes are introduced. Pending implementation and explicit sequencing: The supplied complete PR body explicitly requires landing #284 first. That related PR is open and draft in the captured context, and describes all three behaviors summarized by these notes. The unrelated audio change at #278 is explicitly excluded. Current-main and release context: Current main has an empty Unreleased section; its v0.15.2 notes describe launcher serialization rather than helper ownership. The local v0.15.2 tag points to the supplied release commit 199afb3.
Findings	None	None.
Security	None	None.

How this fits together

imsg’s injected bridge handles advanced messaging operations inside Messages.app. The changelog translates bridge fixes into release information for users.

flowchart LR
  A[Bridge ownership fix] --> B[Unreleased notes]
  B --> C[Release preparation]
  C --> D[Dated release notes]
  D --> E[Users reviewing updates]

Loading

Before merge

• Complete next step (P2) - Merge fix: give the injected bridge helper a single owner per container #284 first, then confirm these notes still describe the landed behavior.

Agent review details

Security

None.

Review metrics

None.

Technical review

Best possible solution:

Keep the notes aligned with the ownership fix that actually lands, then date and publish them through the existing release-preparation process.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable: this PR changes release-note prose only; the underlying bridge defect belongs to the linked implementation PR.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes: a short Unreleased highlight and credited entry follow existing changelog conventions, provided the documented implementation lands first.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning medium; reviewed against 34aa2b26afce.

Labels

Label changes:

• add P3: This is a four-line release-note update with no executable behavior change.
• add rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• add status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This collaborator-authored PR changes only release-note prose; bridge runtime proof belongs to the separate implementation review.

Label justifications:

• P3: This is a four-line release-note update with no executable behavior change.
• rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This collaborator-authored PR changes only release-note prose; bridge runtime proof belongs to the separate implementation review.

Evidence

What I checked:

• Exact introduced change: The pinned base-to-head diff adds four lines only to CHANGELOG.md; no runtime, dependency, workflow, version, or permission changes are introduced. (CHANGELOG.md:5, 8ed0e4ec02dd)
• Pending implementation and explicit sequencing: The supplied complete PR body explicitly requires landing fix: give the injected bridge helper a single owner per container #284 first. That related PR is open and draft in the captured context, and describes all three behaviors summarized by these notes. The unrelated audio change at fix: make native audio messages playable inline #278 is explicitly excluded.
• Current-main and release context: Current main has an empty Unreleased section; its v0.15.2 notes describe launcher serialization rather than helper ownership. The local v0.15.2 tag points to the supplied release commit 199afb3. (CHANGELOG.md:3, 34aa2b26afce)
• Existing bridge lifecycle: The unchanged helper starts both watchers during bootstrap and removes the shared readiness marker during cleanup, without the proposed per-container ownership gate. (Sources/IMsgHelper/IMsgInjected.m:6959, 8ed0e4ec02dd)
• Release contract: Release publication requires synchronized version metadata, one dated changelog section, merged release preparation, and green main CI. This PR leaves those publication steps separate. (docs/RELEASING.md:17, 8ed0e4ec02dd)
• Release-note routing history: Current-main history records Peter Steinberger on several prior release-note preparation and user-impact summary commits. This supports routing independently of authorship of the reviewed branch; it does not establish exact line introduction. (CHANGELOG.md, 14c8c13539a9)

Likely related people:

• steipete: Suggested for follow-up; no historical authorship or introduction is verified. (role: unverified routing candidate; confidence: low)

Rating scale

Score	Internal tier	Crab rank	Meaning
6/6	S	🦀 challenger crab	Exceptional readiness
5/6	A	🦞 diamond lobster	Very strong readiness
4/6	B	🐚 platinum hermit	Good normal PR; ordinary maintainer review
3/6	C	🦐 gold shrimp	Useful, but confidence is limited
2/6	D	🦪 silver shellfish	Proof or implementation needs work
1/6	F	🧂 unranked krab	Not merge-ready
N/A	NA	🌊 off-meta tidepool	Rating does not apply

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality.
Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

Workflow

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.

[steipete]

Maintainer verification of 8ed0e4ec02ddc63a28087bb5e4d2db31f18e0a73:

• Exact-head macOS and Linux CI passed: https://github.com/openclaw/imsg/actions/runs/34147044733.
• Independent committed-branch autoreview against origin/main is scoped-clean at P0–P2.
• The diff adds only four Unreleased changelog lines; released sections and version metadata are unchanged.
• fix: give the injected bridge helper a single owner per container #284 is prepared at ddccd1d6a275879b50eb7b4a0c1b1c127047b9fc, with green macOS/Linux CI, clean autoreview, 754 passing Swift tests, native helper tests, and real process/client proof: fix: give the injected bridge helper a single owner per container #284 (comment).

Merge #284 first, then this notes PR. The dependency recheck found no new eligible bump, and #278 remains excluded under the existing maintainer inline-playback proof gate. Recommend patch 0.15.3 after the combined main is verified and release preparation is separately authorized.

The optional CodeQL run is still in Swift autobuild at this verification point: https://github.com/openclaw/imsg/actions/runs/34147043330. GitHub reports no required checks for this branch; the dedicated CI workflow above has completed successfully. Recheck that optional run during the landing follow-up. No merge, tag, or release was performed.