docs(adrs): sweep the ADR corpus for inconsistencies and stale claims - #183
Open
laurigates wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
docs(adrs): sweep the ADR corpus for inconsistencies and stale claims#183laurigates wants to merge 1 commit into
laurigates wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
A 7-dimension sweep of the 9-ADR corpus and its dependent docs, adversarially verified. 50 candidate defects, 28 survived refutation. The dominant class is a claim that was true when written and is no longer: - ADR-0008 Decision 3 enumerated what #110 was still missing ("no training-step adapter, no VRAM read-out, no `just bench`"); PR #161 landed all three the day after the ADR. Annotated, not overwritten — Decision 3 itself still binds, since #110 is open and no real-model step has been timed. - ADR-0004's M15 amendment reserved the quant-path merge as "the tracked #83 follow-up"; #83 is closed, so it now reads as explicitly untracked. - ADR-0003 described a factory signature and an un-taken eviction cut that have both since changed. Second class: a claim an ADR retracted elsewhere but left standing at the point of use. ADR-0005 Investigation fact 5 still asserted a ~1.5-2 GB shortfall its own Addendum 2 measures at ~2.5-3x the card, and Decision 3 still bolded the "fewer trained sites" lever its own preceding parenthetical retires. Both marked in place, per the corpus convention of annotating rather than deleting. Also reconciles the 10.3 GB / 10.1 GiB MiB-over-1000 artifact across ADR-0005, the roadmap and the example configs, keeping the derived 24.7 GB sum in the basis it was computed in rather than silently re-footing it; repoints 11 drifted code references in the LoKr PRD; and registers ADR-0005/6/7/8/10 and PRD-0001 in the blueprint manifest, which tracked only ADR-0001-0004. ADR-0007 stays `Proposed`. The sweep flipped it to `Accepted` on the strength of ADR-0008 and ADR-0010 building on it; that is not an acceptance event, so it is reverted and left for a deliberate call. Gate: `just fmt-check`, `just lint`, `just test` (66 suites) all green. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017syqaWwKyzpcgV5GB5ZrPw
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
A 7-dimension sweep of the 9-ADR corpus and its dependent docs (roadmap, README,
hubs/,docs/api/, the blueprint manifest), adversarially verified. 50candidate defects; 28 survived refutation and are fixed here.
The three classes it found
1. True when written, false now. The dominant class, and the one nothing
flags on its own.
just bench"ADR-0008's paragraph is annotated, not overwritten — Decision 3 still binds,
because #110 is open and no real-model step has been timed. That distinction is
the whole point of the annotation.
2. Retracted in one place, still live in another. ADR-0005 Investigation
fact 5 asserted a ~1.5–2 GB shortfall that its own Addendum 2 measures at
~2.5–3× the card; Decision 3 still bolded the "fewer trained sites" lever that
its own preceding parenthetical retires. Both marked at the point of use, per the
corpus convention of annotating rather than deleting.
3. Unit-basis drift. The 10.3 GB vs 10.1 GiB MiB÷1000 artifact, reconciled
across ADR-0005, the roadmap and the example configs. The derived
≈ 24.7 GBsumis deliberately left in the basis it was computed in rather than silently
re-footed — 10.1 GiB is 10.85 GB, so the arithmetic does not survive an in-place
number swap.
Also: 11 drifted code references repointed in the LoKr PRD (each verified against
the symbol, not the offset); ADR-0005/6/7/8/10 and PRD-0001 registered in the
blueprint manifest, which tracked only ADR-0001–0004.
What is deliberately not changed
ADR-0007 stays
Proposed. The sweep flipped it toAcceptedbecause ADR-0008and ADR-0010 build on its Decision 3. A later ADR depending on one is not an
acceptance event, so it is reverted. The tension is real and worth a deliberate
call — see the gap list below.
ADR-0009 is not missing. It is reserved for #162's bench timing-mechanism
decision. No change needed.
Gaps this surfaces (need issues — not filed here)
closed; the code still refuses
training_adapter+compute.quant, which theint4 real-Turbo run needs.
M14: end-to-end Krea 2 LoRA training + ComfyUI/Turbo interop proof #25 closed on Krea-2-Raw.
and the roadmap all quote has no committed artifact — the probe summary was
never captured, the ledger logs are an off-repo popos path, and one
measurement's instrumentation was on a deleted fork branch. The project already
does this right once (
docs/evidence/m14-krea2-dog-interop.jpg); the conventionwas never applied to the VRAM numbers. This is the same shape as the failure
that forced ADR-0005's withdrawal sweep.
Verification
just fmt-check,just lint,just test— green (66 suites, 0 failures).identical except the two intended additions.
Three independent review lenses (render / facts / record) plus an adjudicator ran
over the final diff. They caught four defects the sweep itself introduced and
three in the hand-repairs, including a README claim whose stated discriminator
was wrong (burn#5162 needs the MMDiT graph — it is not about loaded vs random
weights, and on Metal the random-init case breaks) and two amendment markers dated
by event rather than by authoring. All corrected.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_017syqaWwKyzpcgV5GB5ZrPw