docs: cite MESHBAY_DESIGN.md and a section instead of the merged notes

The per-feature design notes were merged into docs/MESHBAY_DESIGN.md and
deleted from the tree on 2026-09-11, but ~230 comments across the three
packages still named them — usually written `docs/musicbay.md §3.2`, as
though the file were still in docs/. A reader had to know §16 existed to
resolve any of them. They now name the section directly.

Every mapping comes from §16, the concordance, which already records where
each old section landed: musicbay -> §9.8, mediacenter -> §9.7 for the
Videos app and §6.5 where the subject is derived data, photos -> §9.9,
auth-confirm -> §3.6, refactoring-search -> §9.11, invite-pairing-v1 ->
§3.4, per-node-identity-v1 -> §3.2, captcha -> §7.7, chat-sender-keys ->
§4.5, apps/refactor-groups -> §9.1–§9.4, desktop-client-v1 per section.
Bare citations of the same documents (`draft-v6 §2.11`, `§4.8`, `§3.4`)
are retargeted too: those collide with real section numbers in the design
document, so leaving them would have been worse than the named form.

Four cases the concordance does not cover, each decided rather than guessed:

  Sub-item references into documents that no longer exist — mediacenter's
  `§3.3 row 4`, `§3.4b/c`, `apps.md §3b` — name rows and sub-items §9.7 and
  §9.2 do not reproduce. The module-level citation stays; the sub-item
  pointer is dropped.

  The V-findings keep their labels but lose the dead `§10.1/` prefix.
  §13.8 lists V1–V13 as per-application open items, which is not what the
  labels mean in these comments, so pointing them at §13.8 would have been
  a false citation.

  `apps.md §5`'s virtualization requirement has no counterpart anywhere in
  the design document. The requirement is stated in the comment itself, so
  the citation is dropped rather than aimed at a section that does not say
  it.

  Comments that attributed a *sentence* to an old note — musicbay's "several
  thousand files" example, its "what got measured" note, its measured
  ~11%/~26% cover-art figures, the "original no root, whole shared tree"
  call — state the fact without attribution now. §9.8 does not contain those
  sentences and citing it for them would have been wrong.

CLAUDE.md's "a reference to a document that no longer exists" row now says
the concordance is for git history and out-of-tree material; the code cites
sections directly.

Verified: 2851 passed, 4 skipped. The 12 errors in the run are the Firefox
leg of test_sticky_header.py's browser harness, which is broken at the
browser level on this machine — headless Firefox (snap) dies with
`[GFX1-]: RenderCompositorSWGL failed mapping default framebuffer`, renders
nothing, and the probe exits `{"error": "no measurement"}` after its full
90s wait. Chrome runs the same 12 assertions in 3.2s and passes. Nothing
here can affect it: every changed line in style.css is inside a comment.
Also checked: ast.parse on every changed .py, `node --check` on every
changed .js, the /* */ balance in style.css, and that no changed line
exceeds the width its file already used.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

1 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/packages/meshbay-hub/src/meshbay_hub/api/users.py b/packages/meshbay-hub/src/meshbay_hub/api/users.py
index 7b2fc8c..0394f53 100644
--- a/packages/meshbay-hub/src/meshbay_hub/api/users.py
+++ b/packages/meshbay-hub/src/meshbay_hub/api/users.py
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ class RegisterRequest(BaseModel):
     email:           str
     password:        str | None = None    # deprecated — legacy native clients
     auth_key:        str | None = None    # PBKDF2-derived, new clients
-    # Client-generated account recovery key (docs/auth-confirm.md §4.4). Pure
+    # Client-generated account recovery key (docs/MESHBAY_DESIGN.md §3.6). Pure
     # pass-through: appended to the verification e-mail so the user's mailbox
     # backs it up, then dropped. Never written to any table, never logged.
     recovery_key:    str | None = None
@@ -901,7 +901,7 @@ async def verify_email_change(
 
 # ── Passphrase change (Flow A) ──────────────────────────────────────────────
 #
-# docs/auth-confirm.md §3. The passphrase derives two independent values on the
+# docs/MESHBAY_DESIGN.md §3.6. The passphrase derives two independent values on the
 # client: auth_key (verified here) and bundle_key (AES-GCM key for the per-node
 # identity bundles, which live on nodes and never on the hub). The client
 # re-wraps those bundles from the old bundle_key to the new one on every
@@ -1023,7 +1023,7 @@ async def change_password(
 
 # ── Passphrase reset (Flow B) ──────────────────────────────────────────────
 #
-# docs/auth-confirm.md §4.2. An e-mail code re-opens hub login for someone who
+# docs/MESHBAY_DESIGN.md §3.6. An e-mail code re-opens hub login for someone who
 # has lost their passphrase. It recovers no group content — that needs the
 # recovery key, which the client applies on its own after the reset.
 # reset-request never reveals whether an account exists.