A review round read yt-dlp's source and found the comment behind the previous commit's safety-net
marker did not match it. Measured in the worker with a real account cookie and
`player_client=android_vr`: yt-dlp logs `Skipping client "android_vr" since it does not support
cookies`, drops it, and the request left with no client fails with "Requested format is not
available" — not "No player clients have been requested". That raise sits EARLIER in yt-dlp, before
the cookie-capability removal, so the cookie path can never reach it; and an unknown or renamed
client is skipped with a warning and replaced by yt-dlp's defaults, so the other scenario the
comment named cannot reach it either.
So the marker bought nothing: the symptom that does occur was already retriable here before this
branch. It is dropped, the comment now states what was measured, and the test asserts the real
symptom instead of a message the code cannot produce. The cookie-capability filter itself is
vindicated by the same measurement — without it every signed-in download would burn its first
attempt on a client yt-dlp discards.
Also from the round: an enqueue test for a `source_kind="youtube"` job, the one join nothing else
made (a YouTube job stores a bare 11-char ref and the URL the cookie gate keys on is rebuilt by the
adapter — both ends were pinned apart, the join was not, and a break there would stop every YouTube
cookie silently while signed-out downloads kept working). And copy corrections: the group's only
unhedged claim is hedged, "described the video" loses the pipeline vocabulary, and four Hungarian
phrasings that read as translated English are rewritten.
peter
2b56c5c2eb