Read first: contributing before v0.1

[OxBenji]

Progress Ledger is public from day one, but it is still pre-v0.1.

Please do not open large PRs yet. Start with comments, proposals, examples, and questions.

The first goal is to define:

• proof receipt schema
• bounty template
• reviewer rubric
• human/agent submission flow

Small, specific contributions are welcome.

Good early contributions look like:

1. A clearer field for the proof receipt schema.
2. A concrete bounty example that can be objectively verified.
3. A reviewer rule that prevents obvious gaming.
4. A question that exposes an unclear assumption.
5. A small docs PR after discussion settles.

What we are avoiding for now:

• token-first framing
• giant PRs without discussion
• vague progress claims with no artifact
• price/trading language
• anything that makes this feel like a casino instead of a verification experiment

If you want to help, pick an open issue and comment with a short proposal first. I will start assigning issues once v0.1 is clearer.

[OxBenji]

Update: the first v0.1 draft docs are now public:

https://github.com/OxBenji/progress-ledger/tree/main/docs

They are intentionally drafts, not final protocol law. Please use the matching issues to critique the rules before opening large PRs.

Current focus:

• proof receipt schema
• bounty template
• reviewer rubric
• human/agent submission format

Verified over claimed, and discussion before big code changes.

[OxBenji]

Small maintainer update: added a pull request template and clearer pre-v0.1 PR guidance.

The intent is not to slow people down. It is to keep early contributions useful while the rules are still being shaped.

For now:

• start with issue comments when proposing protocol changes
• keep PRs small and linked to prior discussion
• include the verification path
• avoid token/payment-first changes
• avoid replacing whole draft docs without public pressure-testing first

This should make future PRs easier to review and keep the repo aligned around verified over claimed.