Repository navigation
chore(register): C-72 — two corrections, and the cross-repo issues it now cites - #175
Merged
Merged
Conversation
… now cites Filing the cross-repo issues produced evidence that corrects the entry written hours earlier. Recorded as corrections rather than quietly edited. (a) views-faoapi is NOT exposed. C-72 implied the consumer shared our pin; it does not — faoapi pins pyarrow==23.0.1, the patched version, and it is the repo that actually reads the wire. So nobody on the platform is exposed through this path, and the "<17 ceiling" pipeline-core#280 exists to lift binds the producers only. One consumer has already moved past it, in production. That is worth knowing before #280 is scoped as platform-wide work. (b) The re-vendor obligation is stronger than the entry said. ADR-013 §10 is explicit that all three repos vendor the fixture bytes and carry a pinned root-hash equality test, and that a fixture change IS a contract change. Verified faoapi's copy exists at tests/forecast/golden/wire_contract/SHA256SUMS. So the upgrade is a coordinated three-repo re-vendor carrying an undecided question: whether it bumps contract_version, since the payload schema does not change but the encoder's bytes do. Issues filed so the relocation is complete rather than assumed — the C-08 lesson, where a concern was closed here as "tracked upstream" and never opened there: views-postprocessing#174 the coordinating issue views-faoapi#348 heads-up + two questions only their seat can answer views-pipeline-core#280 comment: security dimension + non-uniform ceiling Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.
Filing the cross-repo issues produced evidence that corrects C-72, written hours earlier. Recorded as visible corrections rather than quietly edited.
(a) views-faoapi is not exposed. C-72 implied the consumer shared our pin. It doesn't — faoapi pins
pyarrow==23.0.1, the patched version, and it is the repo that actually reads the wire. Nobody on the platform is exposed through this path, and the<17ceiling pipeline-core#280 exists to lift binds the producers only. One consumer has already moved past it, in production — worth knowing before #280 is scoped as platform-wide work.(b) The re-vendor obligation is stronger than I wrote. ADR-013 §10 is explicit: all three repos vendor the fixture bytes and carry a pinned root-hash equality test, and "a change to the fixture is a change to the contract." Verified faoapi's copy at
tests/forecast/golden/wire_contract/SHA256SUMS. So the upgrade is a coordinated three-repo re-vendor — carrying an undecided question: whether it bumpscontract_version, since the payload schema doesn't change but the encoder's bytes do.Issues filed so the relocation is complete rather than assumed — the C-08 lesson, where a concern was closed here as "tracked upstream" and never opened there:
🤖 Generated with Claude Code