Skip to content

docs: separate buyer gap decisions from evidence history - #309

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 13 commits into
docs/refresh-live-gap-baseline-2026-08-28from
docs/compact-product-gap-decision-surface-20260909
Open

docs: separate buyer gap decisions from evidence history#309
seonghobae wants to merge 13 commits into
docs/refresh-live-gap-baseline-2026-08-28from
docs/compact-product-gap-decision-surface-20260909

Conversation

@seonghobae

@seonghobae seonghobae commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Finding

#238 comment 5598004000 identified a buyer-navigation defect that remained after #307 merged into the documentation branch: docs/product-technical-gap-baseline.md was still 186,500 bytes and mixed the current delivery decision surface with many dated implementation checkpoints before the buyer gap view.

Exact-head review 5154249954 then found a second correctness defect on 187310346c5c42b22e53f734c2c9ce7122df0d7f: the compact surface called a static queue snapshot Current exact observation and recorded 129 open PRs before #309 itself existed. Creating #309 and restoring it to Draft changed the queue to 130 open PRs / 12 Ready / 118 Draft. A static Markdown snapshot cannot remain continuously current, especially when the documentation PR itself changes the observed queue.

Test-first lineage

Predecessor is exact #238 branch head 16098a0eecc57bfc545d22ce632d95d1ffccfe67.

  • Original RED 83a91b6d50f6f43c4ab030ef2e47a77f20106244 requires the canonical baseline to stay at or below 220 lines / 24,000 UTF-8 bytes, place ## Buyer gap matrix within the first 90 lines, keep dated Previous verified cut prose out of the live surface, and preserve the extracted dossier. On the predecessor this is source-semantic RED: the archive path did not exist and the baseline was 186,500 bytes. No hosted RED is claimed before PR publication.
  • Original repair 39dd06d5ba5fde1331f328add44e16c22c53887f reuses the exact predecessor baseline Git blob c4a87e6c70f2c48b6e4ef820f18e8ddb0dca5696 at docs/evidence/product-technical-gap-baseline-through-2026-09-09.md rather than rewriting historical evidence.
  • Self-staleness RED 32b01ebda4ce061e63c926434d4320847c93fbcf requires an explicit observed-at receipt, rejects the continuously-current heading, requires the cut to include this docs: separate buyer gap decisions from evidence history #309 Draft successor in the 130 / 12 / 118 split, and requires explicit live-state supersession after the cut. On predecessor 187310346... this is source-semantic RED; no hosted RED is claimed.
  • Minimal repair 84340f2ac35ddbc0571038418acc93e0f9882595 changes only the bounded buyer surface: ## Observed delivery cut — 2026-09-09 12:57 UTC, self-inclusive queue counts, and an explicit statement that later live GitHub state supersedes the receipt.
  • Traceability 1ca68892dcfa708a99a429dd66e4061841dc3244 records the problem, constraints, rejected continuously-live alternative, decision, risks, exact RED/fix lineage and acceptance contract.
  • Existing historical-baseline regression modules remain preserved and discoverable through their compatibility wrappers. The archived dossier is not rewritten. The branch's existing Unreleased changelog entry for the dated product-gap checkpoint remains truthful for this refinement.

Observation receipt

The 2026-09-09 12:57 UTC cut records 130 open PRs (12 Ready/non-draft, 118 Draft), 14 open non-PR issues, protected main@87c4daa1830bac5a5228b6036752ad5633232085, active ruleset 18156473, and an empty GitHub Release inventory. Those counts are a dated receipt, not a live dashboard; later GitHub state supersedes them.

The matrix keeps the current high-value causal gaps visible near the top:

Current exact-head verification

Exact head is 1ca68892dcfa708a99a429dd66e4061841dc3244 on exact base 16098a0eecc57bfc545d22ce632d95d1ffccfe67.

Repository-native CI 34354999220 completed success on this unchanged exact head. Rust contracts job 102477301921 passed Python repository contracts, canonical formatting, locked workspace tests, strict Clippy, and rustdoc. Production coverage job 102477301569 passed measurement, diagnostics publication, and exact production-coverage enforcement. The Draft-transition CI generations 34354692571 and 34355222743 are skipped and are not additional GREEN evidence.

The PR was returned to Draft immediately after the executable exact-head run completed. Repository GREEN does not satisfy parent adoption, independent review, required central workflow, protected-main, browser, or release acceptance.

Ownership and acceptance

This is a documentation/test-only successor stacked on #238. It does not touch production browser/runtime source, .github/**, workflows, rulesets, secrets, sandboxing, trial counts, another owner branch, protected main, release/tag state or approval state.

Do not merge this PR directly to protected main. Normal adoption into #238 comes first, followed by #238's own current-head verification and governance. No active-PR source result, protocol ACK, advisory review, or clean security scan is protected-main/browser/release acceptance.

@seonghobae
seonghobae marked this pull request as ready for review September 9, 2026 12:20
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: 0f5df801-3026-4b35-977d-99eb26b33259

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • 🔍 Trigger review

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@seonghobae
seonghobae marked this pull request as draft September 9, 2026 12:31

@seonghobae seonghobae left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Exact-head review for 187310346c5c42b22e53f734c2c9ce7122df0d7f finds one remaining code-currentness defect plus one PR-state mismatch. The navigation split itself is sound and same-head native CI 34350606647 completed success before the state correction, but the new live surface says 129 open pull requests / 12 Ready / 117 Draft. Fresh complete GitHub search after #309 exists returns 130 open PRs, and after restoring this PR to Draft the split is 12 Ready / 118 Draft. Because the file is explicitly titled Current exact observation, #309's own creation/state transition makes that observation immediately stale rather than merely historical. Repair by binding the snapshot to an explicit observed-at cut that includes #309, or by otherwise making the self-reference semantics explicit; do not silently retain 129 as current truth. Separately, the PR body says Keep this PR Draft but the live PR was Ready; I restored Draft without changing head/base/source. The Draft-transition CI 34351493514 is skipped and is not new GREEN. No approval or merge-ready claim.

@seonghobae
seonghobae marked this pull request as ready for review September 9, 2026 13:06
@seonghobae
seonghobae marked this pull request as draft September 9, 2026 13:08

@seonghobae seonghobae left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Exact-head follow-up for 1ca68892dcfa708a99a429dd66e4061841dc3244: review 5154249954's self-staleness finding is source-repaired. Test-first 32b01eb... rejects a continuously-current queue heading and requires a dated, self-inclusive observation receipt; 84340f2... applies the minimal buyer-surface repair; 1ca6889... aligns traceability. Repository-native CI 34354999220 completed success on this exact head: Python repository contracts, canonical formatting, locked workspace tests, strict Clippy, rustdoc, and exact production coverage all passed. The PR was returned to Draft immediately afterwards; transition runs are skipped and do not add GREEN evidence. This is not an approval or merge-ready claim. #238 adoption, independent/countable review where applicable, required central workflows, protected-main integration, and release evidence remain separate gates.

@seonghobae seonghobae left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Exact-head review on 1ca68892dcfa708a99a429dd66e4061841dc3244 finds a new documentation-contract isolation defect after the navigation split. The live buyer surface is now correctly a dated receipt, but the compatibility loader redirects only module.BASELINE to the archived dossier. The preserved legacy modules still bind mutable current companions: legacy_documentation_active_pr_evidence_contract.py reads current CHANGELOG.md, DOCUMENTATION_FITNESS.md, and active-PR maturity; legacy_gap_snapshot_inventory_consistency.py reads current CHANGELOG.md; legacy_live_gap_evidence_integrity_contract.py reads current CHANGELOG.md, AGENTS.md, and scripts/ci/collect_live_merge_evidence.sh. This is already observable on the same head: the archived September-9 contracts expect the historical 131 open / 14 Ready / 117 Draft changelog receipt, while the new buyer surface records the later 12:57 UTC self-inclusive 130 / 12 / 118 receipt. Simply updating the current changelog to the new cut would therefore make the supposedly historical compatibility tests fail on a valid current documentation update. Preserve the byte-identical legacy modules, but isolate every historical input they consume (or split the still-current operational assertions into dedicated current contracts) so archived evidence tests no longer pin mutable current documents/scripts. Then make the live changelog/current decision surface use an unambiguous dated receipt rather than two differently scoped 'current' inventory claims. Do not weaken/delete the historical assertions. This is a COMMENT finding, not approval or merge readiness.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Writer lease ACTIVE — exact 1ca68892dcfa708a99a429dd66e4061841dc3244, bounded to review 5155412458's immediate changelog/archive coupling only. Scope: test-first require the live buyer receipt and live CHANGELOG.md inventory receipt to agree at the same observed cut; preserve the predecessor changelog used by legacy archived-baseline contracts as immutable evidence and rebind only their CHANGELOG input to that snapshot. Do not edit byte-identical legacy modules, production/browser source, .github/**, workflows/rulesets/secrets, Ready/Draft state, base, browser trials/sandbox, merge/tag/release. Re-read intervening head before every write and release after exact-head verification/readback.

@seonghobae
seonghobae marked this pull request as ready for review September 9, 2026 14:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant