Skip to content

docs: state the cap as three counts, because one number hid a disagreement #5

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
hunterdsp merged 2 commits into from
Jul 31, 2026
Merged

docs: state the cap as three counts, because one number hid a disagreement #5

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
24b8e66
docs: state the cap as three counts, because one number hid a disagre…
hunterdsp Jul 31, 2026
9c01449
docs: tick P0, and record what prototyping first caught
hunterdsp Jul 31, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
29 changes: 26 additions & 3 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -213,7 +213,23 @@ Universal (9): `all help setup clean test test-fast lint format install-deps`,
plus one `lint-<tool>` dispatch target per configured tool. Feature groups
defined only when flagged — `HAS_DOCS`, `HAS_C`, `HAS_DOXYGEN`, `HAS_PYTHON`, `HAS_RUST`,
`HAS_BENCH`, `HAS_COVERAGE`, `HAS_RELEASE`, `HAS_EXAMPLES` — plus `test-all` / `gates`
aggregates. **Cap: 38 targets with every flag on.**
aggregates.

**Cap, with every flag on: 35 user-facing + N dispatch + 3 enforcement.** The
three counts are separate because they scale differently — `N` is per-repo (the
tools that repo configures) and the enforcement gates are fixed — and stating
them as one number is how a cap stops being a check. It had already happened
here: this line read "38 targets", the P0 prototype measured 38, and the two
were different sets of 38. The plan was counting `lint-<tool>` and not the
enforcement gates, and P0 counted the reverse, so two offsetting errors agreed.

The 35 is the [#555](https://github.com/doppler-dsp/doppler/issues/555) group
table summed: 9 universal + 2 aggregates + 24 across the nine groups
(`HAS_DOCS` 3, `HAS_C` 3, `HAS_DOXYGEN` 2, `HAS_PYTHON` 3, `HAS_RUST` 1,
`HAS_BENCH` 3, `HAS_COVERAGE` 2, `HAS_RELEASE` 6, `HAS_EXAMPLES` 1). Check a
build against that table **target-for-target, not in total** — summing to the
right number is what hid this. Repo-local targets (`LOCAL_TARGETS`) are outside
the cap by definition: they are what criterion 1 bounds.

`install-deps` is universal (system packages via `jbx install-deps`; a no-op
where a repo declares none) and is distinct from `setup`, which installs
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -295,10 +311,17 @@ reasoned about.

### Phases

- [ ] **P0 — prototype** `standard.mk` in just-makeit; vendored, drift gate
- [x] **P0 — prototype** `standard.mk` in just-makeit; vendored, drift gate
inert until P1 publishes canonical. Also collapses just-makeit's `install`
(`uv sync --group dev`) into `setup`, of which it is a strict subset, so a
fourth deps-ish name never reaches the standard *(just-makeit)*
fourth deps-ish name never reaches the standard *(just-makeit)* —
**done**, [just-buildit/just-makeit#636](https://github.com/just-buildit/just-makeit/pull/636).
Prototyping in one repo before publishing paid for itself twice: the file
rejected the GNU make 3.81 that macOS ships, and the gates parsed a
`make -p` database whose wording changed in 3.82. Both would have gone out
to every adopter at once. **P1 must publish the post-review file**, which also
carries `coverage-gate`, `HAS_EXAMPLES` reduced to `test-examples`, and
`all` defaulting to `build` where `HAS_C`.
- [ ] **P1 — publish** canonical `standard.mk` in this org; wire the drift gate
live *(just-buildit)*
- [ ] **P2 — doppler port**: `docs-check` first (deletes the three-way
Expand Down
Loading