siddharthd
95d8544752
ci / lint-test (push) Successful in 46s
Owner was write-once for every ingestion path — a pantry receipt hardcodes DEFAULT_OWNER_ID and there was not one `UPDATE ... SET owner_id` in src/ — so a shop the other person paid for was permanently filed as yours. PATCH /api/transactions/[id] now takes owner_id, for manual rows only. A statement row returns 400 statement_owned and points at the statements page: its effective owner is COALESCE(t.owner_id, s.owner_id), so writing it there would either no-op or detach one row from the account it came from. PATCH /api/statements/[id] is new. The statements page has had an owner dropdown since it was built, wired to a route with no PATCH handler — every change 405'd, and because useUpdateStatement never checked res.ok it failed silently and the select snapped back on refetch. It writes both tables: 2,194 statement rows carry their own owner_id against 1,803 that inherit, so updating `statements` alone moves less than half and splits one account's history between two people. The guard is the point. Access is "owner OR holds a split", so handing a row over while holding no split removes it from your list and 404s every route that could put it back — only the new owner can undo it. That is 409 would_lose_access, and the modal offers both ways forward: add my split first, or give it away anyway. Taking a row onto your own ledger is never blocked, and claiming a row you cannot see is a 404 before any owner logic runs. Splits are deliberately not rewritten. They record shares, not direction, so a 50/50 flips from "they owe me" to "I owe them" untouched, settled included. Also adds the missing res.ok check to useUpdateTransaction, without which every rejection resolved as success: the modal closed, the list refetched, and the edit silently vanished. 14 new integration tests; 203 integration + 130 unit green.