A competitor's name, and a customer's tenant, in a repository about to be public

A competitor's name, and a customer's tenant, in a repository about to be public The parity work was surveyed against a live tenant of a named commercial DAM, and the survey went into the repository with the tenant's hostname and demo account in its third line. That is somebody else's account, published in a document about this system — the one thing here that could not be walked back after the repository goes public. `ACQUIA-PARITY.md` is deleted rather than edited: with the tenant reference removed there is nothing left in it that TASKS.md's Q section does not already say. The vendor's name went with it, in prose and in code. Around thirty comments and migration headers cited it — and the acquired product's name alongside it — to explain why a table looks the way it does, which is genuinely the reason and worth keeping. They now say **the comparator**, grounded once at the top of ARCHITECTURE.md along with why the name is not there. The reasoning survives; the benchmarking against a named competitor does not. **`import_jobs.source` keeps its vendor identifiers.** `'widen', 'bynder', 'brandfolder', 'aprimo', 'canto', …` is a CHECK constraint enumerating systems this can migrate *from*: interoperability naming, the same kind of fact as a supported file format, and not a comparison of anything. Renaming them would also mean a migration to alter a shipped CHECK for no benefit. `design-qa.md` is deleted for a different reason: it was a one-off QA note whose evidence is three files in `/tmp` and a `.png` that is now a `.jpg`. Nothing links to it and nothing can reproduce it. `NEEDS-REVIEW.md` stays, and deleting it was a mistake caught before pushing: it is a redirect saying every parked question was answered, and thirty-six places — source comments, migrations, `openapi.json`, the generated TypeScript — point at it by name. Removing the target of that many references to save thirty lines is a worse repository, not a tidier one.