docs(automation): retarget closed-unmerged #840 and #906 lineage

[cursor]

Next action

Do not merge #896 on head d289615f. This successor keeps that documentation graph and retargets live GitHub objects so active_pr rows name open pull requests only.

What changed

• IG-001 / TM-03 now point at open Draft fix(actions): bound agent mention dispatch envelopes #1021, the bounded successor to closed-unmerged fix(actions): bound agent mention dispatch envelope #840.
• Redaction PRD-08 / TM-01 / ADR-0009 now point at open fix(redaction): keep Actions group markers from wiping JSON evidence #1031. Closed-unmerged fix(sandbox): replay redaction after fixture-history contamination #906 is superseded. Overlapping fix(redaction): preserve raw JSON layout atomically #929 must not merge in parallel.
• Documentation contract tests bind those live locators.
• Rewrite the docs: establish authoritative automation control-plane specifications #896 body identity if that PR is kept: live base is c47afc2d, live head is no longer a7fbb22f, and mergeable_state is blocked.

Verification

python3 -m pytest tests/test_automation_documentation_contract.py tests/test_automation_doctoring_index_contract.py tests/test_automation_historical_loop_supersession_contract.py -q → 26 passed.

Current-head hosted checks on this successor must regenerate. Predecessor #896 checks and reviews are not acceptance for this head.

  

[seonghobae]

Rebased the automation control-plane specification/ADR/documentation series onto current origin/main c47bee5 and retained the #840/#906 supersession lineage.

Current HEAD: 39c12c3

Validation on this HEAD:

• automation documentation/doctoring pytest: 26 passed
• actionlint and git diff --check passed

@OpenCode review this exact HEAD after the rebase.

[seonghobae]

Exact-current-head repair loop: rebased the documentation lineage contract onto protected main 2cce96f. Current head 271fc60. Documentation, doctoring, and supersession contracts (26) passed; compileall and diff-check passed. Hosted Checks are regenerating; keep Draft and review this exact head only.

[seonghobae]

Current-head merge repair pushed normally at 9f450d68 after reconciling the stale main base; the automation control-plane docs and README standalone/composable governance were preserved with the exact-artifact SBOM contract. Please observe Checks for this exact head; no merge bypass is used.

[seonghobae]

pip-audit reported PYSEC-2026-3721 against pip 26.1.2. Updated the exact pinned lock to pip 26.2.1 with both release hashes. Local validation passed: 50 queue-contract tests, locked pip-audit, and diff checks. Hosted Checks and an exact-head independent approval remain required.

[seonghobae]

Triage (2026-09-02): base history is orphaned, not a resolvable merge conflict

This PR's base commit 55a8b576725451dfe0a21a57d36a2f1a41619b24 is not an ancestor of current main:

$ git merge-base --is-ancestor 55a8b576725451dfe0a21a57d36a2f1a41619b24 origin/main && echo yes || echo no
no
$ git merge origin/main --no-edit
fatal: refusing to merge unrelated histories

origin/main now has multiple historical roots (a restructuring/history-splice happened after this branch was cut from an older main), so there is no common ancestor for an ordinary 3-way merge. Forcing --allow-unrelated-histories would diff every shared file against an empty tree and manufacture spurious conflicts across the whole tree — not a real fix, and not something to push through mechanically.

The mergeable_state: dirty GitHub reports here reflects that structural gap, not a normal content conflict this session's usual merge-main-and-resolve recipe can repair.

Next action (needs a human/design call): either (a) reimplement the intent of this PR as a fresh branch cut from current main — the historical commits can't be replayed as-is — or (b) verify whether the documentation-graph retargeting this PR performs is now moot, since predecessor #896 was itself closed unmerged around the same time this history diverged (and #1021/#1031, the PRs this doc PR retargets to, need their own live-state check). Not closing this myself since I haven't verified current state. Leaving open pending that decision.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[seonghobae]

Retraction — the "main history splice" diagnosis was wrong.

An earlier comment on this PR claimed main's history was spliced onto new roots around 2026-08-20/21, that this PR's base predates the boundary, and that an ordinary merge would fail with fatal: refusing to merge unrelated histories requiring a from-scratch re-implementation. That diagnosis is incorrect — please disregard it entirely.

Root cause: the analysis was run from a shallow git clone in the analysis sandbox (git rev-parse --is-shallow-repository → true). A shallow clone's truncation boundary commits look exactly like disjoint history roots, and git merge from inside a shallow checkout genuinely does throw fatal: refusing to merge unrelated histories even when the real, full history is perfectly linear and connected. After git fetch --unshallow, origin/main has exactly one root commit, and this PR's base is a completely normal ancestor of current main.

This PR should be triaged the ordinary way: fetch a full (non-shallow) clone, git fetch origin main && git merge origin/main --no-edit, resolve any real content conflicts, run the repo's gates, and push. There is no history-splice blocker and no need to abandon or re-implement this PR's work.

Apologies for the incorrect guidance. See #1722 for the corrected writeup.

---

Generated by Claude Code