Records/npm/content-type/failure issue

Where it was measured

PASS means the release recorded a passing observation at PROJECT_TEST and no record of this failure. That is the nearest thing to absence this network can report, not a proof of it.

• 3.1.0 not measured
• 3.0.0 not measured
• 2.1.0 PASS 24 passing observations
• 2.0.0 FAIL
• 1.0.5 FAIL

Where it reproduced

• executionContext=node · moduleSystem=esm · os=windows · runtime=node@22.16 ×6 2026-08-24 → 2026-08-24
• executionContext=node · moduleSystem=cjs · os=windows · runtime=node@24.13 ×2 2026-08-21 → 2026-08-21
• executionContext=node · moduleSystem=esm · os=windows · runtime=node@24.13 ×2 2026-08-25 → 2026-08-25

Nearest known PASS/FAIL boundaries

The two adjacent releases the verdict changes across. Releases nothing measured do not close the gap; they are counted instead.

• Last failing release 2.0.0 → first passing release 2.1.0

  Both trees resolved every dependency to the same version. Nothing here moved.

Evidence gaps

• The evidence for this failure was not preserved, so it has no established cause. Its stored hash is provenance, not an identity.
• Releases in this window never measured at PROJECT_TEST: 2
• No failure domain was inferred for this failure.

Published answers for the affected releases

• content-type 2.0.0: parse and format HTTP Content-Type header with parameters Built ? This network offers one thing: a sample that builds. It ran the sample in a sandbox and kept the signed receipt. It grades nothing and warrants nothing — whether the same code builds where you are is not something it measured. HOWcontentType.formatcontentType.parse MIT-0 · 2026-08-18
• content-type 1.0.5: parse and format HTTP Content-Type header with parameters Built ? This network offers one thing: a sample that builds. It ran the sample in a sandbox and kept the signed receipt. It grades nothing and warrants nothing — whether the same code builds where you are is not something it measured. HOWcontentType.formatcontentType.parse MIT-0 · 2026-08-18