See the pieces connect.

A working feature is a chain, not a screen.

Short answers are useful when one setting is wrong. Complete projects are useful when the same symptom could come from data design, navigation context, action order, or temporary interface state. They show how records move through an experience and where a local shortcut creates a later failure.

The preserved Foodmood build follows one connected app through identity, profiles, sessions, lists, and matching behavior. Its older video interface is clearly labeled, but the project remains valuable as a map of dependencies: which collection owns a value, which relationship carries it, which screen receives the current record, and which action changes durable state.

Work through a project with a small test fixture rather than copying the final interface. Name the invariant for each step, create sample users and records that should pass or fail, and verify state after leaving and returning to the screen. That process distinguishes a saved relationship from a temporary visual state and makes later debugging much faster.

More projects will be added only when there is enough evidence and source material to explain the full workflow honestly. If your build exposes a missing end-to-end case, describe the expected result and failure in the question queue.

A useful submission names the smallest complete journey, the state that must survive navigation, and the test record that proves the result in both success and failure states.