Re-keying alone could not undo an existing shared charge. It handed the single
entity to whichever client was looked at first and left the other order pointing
at a charge it does not own. Because :sales-order/charges is a component
attribute, that is not untidy but dangerous: retracting either order deletes a
charge the other still needs. It also produced double tender when the second
client re-imported and created its own.
split-and-rekey-charges! now gives every order its own charge. The first order
to claim a shared charge keeps it, re-keyed to that order's client and location;
every other order gets a copy carrying the same amounts, scoped to itself, with
its reference repointed. Afterwards no charge has more than one parent order and
the component relationship means what it says.
charges-with-multiple-parents is the §3.3 gate, which must read zero before any
historical cleanup or voided-order retraction is safe.
Four tests cover it: that the shared condition exists to begin with, that the
split produces two distinct entities with amounts copied and one parent each,
that an unshared charge is only re-keyed, and that re-running changes nothing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Bryce
784c221f99