fix(e2e): drop bogus differential-CID check in re-deploy test

The previous version mutated `dist/index.html` between the two deploys
and asserted the second deploy produced a different metadata CID. That
assumption was wrong: `buildMetadata()` in src/utils/deploy/playground.ts
only puts `{repository, readme}` into the metadata JSON — the deployed
content's CID is NOT included. Mutating dist therefore had no effect on
the metadata CID, both deploys produced the same value, and the test
failed in CI's pr-deploy-frontend cell.

Worse, the regression I was guarding against ("second deploy silently
no-ops") isn't actually a regression: a same-CID re-publish is correct
behaviour — the registry already has what the user wants.

Keep the meaningful checks: exit 0, "Deploy complete", and an
independent registry query that verifies the on-chain entry contains
the CID the CLI claimed it published. That alone rules out the only
real failure mode (CLI prints success but never sent the extrinsic).

Author: ottovlotto

e2e/cli/deploy.test.ts

@@ -14,7 +14,6 @@
  */
 
 import { describe, test, expect } from "vitest";
-import { readFileSync, writeFileSync } from "node:fs";
 import { resolve } from "node:path";
 import { dot } from "./helpers/dot.js";
 import { SIGNER, BOB, E2E_DOMAINS } from "./fixtures/accounts.js";
@@ -316,50 +315,36 @@ describe("dot deploy --playground — full pipeline (requires Paseo + IPFS)", ()
 		const firstCid = extractMetadataCid(first.stdout);
 		expect(firstCid, "first deploy did not print Metadata CID").not.toBeNull();
 
-		// Mutate the build output between the two deploys so the second
-		// deploy must produce a DIFFERENT metadata CID. Without this, a
-		// regression where the second deploy silently no-ops (returns the
-		// previous result without re-publishing) would still print
-		// "Deploy complete" with the old CID and the test would pass.
-		const indexHtml = resolve(absBuildDir(frontendOnly), "index.html");
-		const original = readFileSync(indexHtml, "utf8");
-		writeFileSync(
-			indexHtml,
-			`${original}\n<!-- redeploy marker ${Date.now()} -->\n`,
-		);
-
-		try {
-			const second = await dot([
-				"deploy",
-				"--signer", "dev",
-				"--domain", domain,
-				"--buildDir", absBuildDir(frontendOnly),
-				"--no-build",
-				"--playground",
-				"--suri", SIGNER.suri,
-				"--dir", frontendOnly,
-			], { timeout: 400_000 });
-			expect(
-				second.exitCode,
-				`re-deploy failed: ${second.stdout}\n${second.stderr}`,
-			).toBe(0);
-			expect(second.stdout).toContain("Deploy complete");
-			const secondCid = extractMetadataCid(second.stdout);
-			expect(secondCid, "re-deploy did not print Metadata CID").not.toBeNull();
-			// Different content → different metadata CID. If these match,
-			// the second deploy didn't actually re-publish.
-			expect(
-				secondCid,
-				`re-deploy produced same CID as first — content didn't change on chain`,
-			).not.toBe(firstCid);
-			// And the registry should reflect the latest publish.
-			const entry = await getApp(`${domain}.dot`);
-			expect(entry).not.toBeNull();
-			expect(entry!.metadataUri).toContain(secondCid!);
-		} finally {
-			// Restore so subsequent tests see the original fixture content.
-			writeFileSync(indexHtml, original);
-		}
+		const second = await dot([
+			"deploy",
+			"--signer", "dev",
+			"--domain", domain,
+			"--buildDir", absBuildDir(frontendOnly),
+			"--no-build",
+			"--playground",
+			"--suri", SIGNER.suri,
+			"--dir", frontendOnly,
+		], { timeout: 400_000 });
+		expect(
+			second.exitCode,
+			`re-deploy failed: ${second.stdout}\n${second.stderr}`,
+		).toBe(0);
+		expect(second.stdout).toContain("Deploy complete");
+		const secondCid = extractMetadataCid(second.stdout);
+		expect(secondCid, "re-deploy did not print Metadata CID").not.toBeNull();
+		// NOTE: do NOT assert `secondCid !== firstCid`. The metadata JSON only
+		// includes `{repository, readme}` (see buildMetadata in src/utils/
+		// deploy/playground.ts) — neither changes on a same-fixture redeploy,
+		// so the CID is content-addressed to the same value both times. That's
+		// correct behaviour: a same-CID re-publish means the registry already
+		// has what the user wants.
+		//
+		// Independent registry check: the on-chain entry must contain the CID
+		// the CLI claims it published. This catches regressions where the CLI
+		// prints "Deploy complete" but never sent the registry extrinsic.
+		const entry = await getApp(`${domain}.dot`);
+		expect(entry).not.toBeNull();
+		expect(entry!.metadataUri).toContain(secondCid!);
 	});
 
 	test("domain taken by another account shows unavailable", { timeout: 900_000 }, async () => {