Merge pull request 'docs(ci): describe the desktop CI runner, not gitdan-ci' (#33) from chore/closeout-2026-11-08 into main

.gitea/workflows/ci.yaml

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ on:
     # cost and the evidence are in README's Development section.
     types: [opened, synchronize, reopened, edited]
 
-# The desktop runner (gitdan#112) has few slots, and the compiler-backed
+# The desktop runner (gitdan#112) has exactly one slot (the `desktop` label, capacity 1), and the compiler-backed
 # suites below are multi-minute. A superseded run costs a slot in front of
 # somebody's build, so drop it.
 #
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ jobs:
     # `mktemp -d` and want a cold target dir every time — a persistent cache
     # would make "did this run rebuild?" unanswerable, which is the question
     # restore-mtimes-selftest.sh exists to ask. So this job takes no share of
-    # the shared CI cache disk budget.
+    # the host's shared CI cache disk budget (ci_cache_reclaim).
     steps:
       - name: Checkout sources
         uses: actions/checkout@v4

README.md

@@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ its bare default; either restores the bug.
 run.** Gitea populates no `changes` field for a title-or-body edit, unlike
 GitHub, so the workflow cannot tell the edit that un-drafts a PR from an
 ordinary body PATCH — a closing-reference fix-up, say. The price is around
-**90 seconds** of a runner shared across four repos on two capacity slots: the
+**90 seconds** of a runner shared across several repos (one capacity-1 `desktop` slot now; measured on gitdan-ci's two): the
 last twelve non-skipped runs of this job, `started_at` to `completed_at` off
 the Actions API, are 83 s median over 77–106 s. `timeout-minutes: 20` is a
 ceiling for a hung suite, not a duration. It is also bounded: the workflow's