feat(pipeline): report when a re-ingest disagrees with the page on disk (#104)

The asymmetry that makes unattended ingest safe (#103) also discarded a
real signal. When a fresh extraction produced a different version of a
section already on disk, the on-disk version won and the model's version
went in the bin without a word — so "the source is unchanged" and "the
source changed its mind and we ignored it" were indistinguishable.

wiki.MergeReport now returns the headings where the incoming version
disagreed and lost, and the ingest run reports them as warnings, which
AppendLog already writes into log.md.

This is the simplified answer to contradiction flagging at ingest. The
issue proposed calling brain-gardener's Judge from the ingest path, which
needs either a shared Go module across two repos or an HTTP service that
does not exist — and puts an LLM call on the write path, where a timeout
must neither fail the ingest nor silently mark nothing as contested.

None of that is necessary to get the signal. The merge already computes
the disagreement; it was throwing it away. Surfacing it costs nothing,
needs no model, no cue-word matcher, no cross-repo dependency, and is
deterministic.

Deliberately textual disagreement, not semantic contradiction. Deciding
whether a disagreement is a genuine contradiction stays with the
Judge-gated enrich pass that already runs hourly and is approval-gated by
design (brain-gardener#175). Detection here, adjudication there.

Merge is kept as a thin wrapper over MergeReport so existing callers are
untouched.

Refs #104, #103, brain-gardener#175, brain#21.

ingestion/internal/wiki/merge_test.go

@@ -143,3 +143,56 @@ Rewritten by the model.
 	assert.Contains(t, got, "Original.", "an existing section still wins over the model's rewrite")
 	assert.NotContains(t, got, "Renamed by the model")
 }
+
+func TestMerge_ReportsSectionsWhereTheFreshVersionWasDiscarded(t *testing.T) {
+	// The asymmetry that makes ingest safe (on-disk wins) also throws away a
+	// real signal: the source now says something different about a section we
+	// already have. Today that disagreement is silently discarded, so nobody
+	// can tell "the source is unchanged" from "the source changed its mind and
+	// we ignored it".
+	existing := Page{Path: "wiki/sources/x.md", Content: `---
+title: 'X'
+---
+
+## Summary
+
+Appetite is fixed, scope is variable.
+
+## Method
+
+Six-week cycles.
+`}
+	fresh := Page{Path: "wiki/sources/x.md", Content: `---
+title: 'X'
+---
+
+## Summary
+
+Appetite is negotiable and scope is fixed.
+
+## Method
+
+Six-week cycles.
+`}
+
+	got, conflicts := MergeReport(existing, fresh)
+
+	assert.Contains(t, got.Content, "Appetite is fixed", "on-disk version still wins")
+	assert.NotContains(t, got.Content, "negotiable")
+	assert.Equal(t, []string{"Summary"}, conflicts,
+		"only the section that actually disagreed is reported")
+}
+
+func TestMerge_ReportsNothingWhenTheFreshVersionAgrees(t *testing.T) {
+	page := Page{Path: "wiki/sources/x.md", Content: `---
+title: 'X'
+---
+
+## Summary
+
+Appetite is fixed, scope is variable.
+`}
+
+	_, conflicts := MergeReport(page, page)
+	assert.Empty(t, conflicts, "identical content is not a disagreement")
+}