fix: correct HTTP middleware logging and recovery

[raeperd]

Summary

A panic previously skipped access logging, while recorder errors could make logs disagree with the response sent to the client. Keep accesslog and recovery as separate middleware, placing accesslog outside recovery so its deferred log observes the recovered response. Each middleware uses its own recorder.

Recovery sends a generic 500 before a final response is committed, preserves ErrAbortHandler, and aborts partial responses after a panic. The access log distinguishes completed and aborted requests. Correct recorder behavior retains the first accepted final status, handles informational headers under HTTP/1 and HTTP/2, records effective implicit 200 responses, and counts bytes actually accepted by the writer.

Writer support stays small: ResponseController flushing and pprof's write-deadline extension. Connection hijacking, direct Flusher support, and generic Unwrap forwarding are outside this template's contract. No dependencies or lifecycle changes.

Testing

• Tests compose accesslog(recovery(handler)) and assert client responses alongside logs over real HTTP connections, including panic/abort behavior, informational headers, duplicate final headers, empty responses, flushing, and health/debug routes.
• Focused writer tests cover short writes, partial failures, and unsupported/failed flushes.
• make build test passed (race/shuffle enabled; 84.0% statement coverage).
• golangci-lint run --allow-serial-runners passed.
• go run golang.org/x/tools/cmd/deadcode@latest -test ./... passed.

[raeperd]

@codex review

[coveralls]

coverage: 83.133% (+3.0%) from 80.128% — codex/request-outcomes into main

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-06T06:33:34.384062Z	3d4df1a	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 3d4df1ab39

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".