timothy
fba5233caf
PR Gates / CI image pin matches docker/ci (pull_request) Successful in 11s
PR Gates / Docs update reminder (pull_request) Successful in 16s
PR Gates / decisions lifecycle (pull_request) Failing after 23s
Build ErsatzTV Image / Formatting (changed .cs conform to .editorconfig) (pull_request) Successful in 1m17s
Build ErsatzTV Image / API docs in sync (OpenAPI + endpoint index) (pull_request) Successful in 1m29s
Build ErsatzTV Image / Build & test (.NET) (pull_request) Successful in 8m5s
Build ErsatzTV Image / EF migration integrity (SQLite + MySql) (pull_request) Successful in 16m5s
Build ErsatzTV Image / Functional E2E (curl + UI contracts) (pull_request) Successful in 17m6s
Build ErsatzTV Image / Build & push image (amd64) (pull_request) Has been skipped
168 records -> docs/decisions/records/<area>/<topic>.md (163 active, 23 dirs) and docs/decisions/archive/<area>/<topic>.md (5 archived). The filename IS the key, so one-active-record-per-key becomes a filesystem property rather than a validator check, and supersession becomes a `git mv`. WHY: the monolith was a concurrency problem before an aesthetic one. A 3,900-line append target made parallel sessions collide -- PR #605 and PR #614 both hit append-vs-append conflicts during routine rebases, and hand-resolving those inside the corpus is exactly the operation the rationale-rewrite guard exists to police. HOW IT IS VERIFIED: a ~170-file diff cannot be meaningfully read, so correctness does not rest on reading it. The parser was taught BOTH formats first, so the body-diff guard parses the old form at the merge-base and the new form at head -- the migration validates itself, no bypass. The proof is a field-level equivalence harness: 168 records before and after, zero lost, zero gained, zero field mismatches, zero rationale bodies differing. Reviewers should scrutinise the harness; it is the actual evidence. What measuring caught that reading would not have: - ~500 lines sit OUTSIDE any record -- decisions.md's lifecycle schema and each topic file's preamble, mostly the only copy. Source files are kept and stripped, never deleted. They also cannot be filed per-area: topic files hold several areas and 4 of 23 areas span several files. - Archive discovery was a non-recursive glob; after the split it found ZERO archived records, surfacing as four bogus "supersedes points to unknown key" errors rather than an obvious failure. - ~32 live docs point into the corpus BY DATE, which the split dangles. Each stripped file now ends with a generated "Records formerly in this file" index, which also rescues the identical breadcrumbs in old issue comments. - decisions.md's "In this file:" list was 97 same-file anchor bullets that the split makes WRONG, not merely stale. Dropped; the generated index replaces them with links that resolve. The equivalence harness now runs against a checked-in FIXTURE, not the live corpus. The earlier version migrated the real tree, which made it a one-shot: the moment the migration landed there was nothing left to move and the tests failed for reasons unrelated to the code. A fixture keeps them testing the SCRIPT rather than the repo's current state. Keys preserved verbatim, warts included: `sched` (12) and `scheduling` (1) remain two directories for one concept. Renaming a key is not a move -- it changes identity, breaks the equivalence proof, and invalidates MemPalace's per-key drawers. Taxonomy normalisation is separate work. refs #610
836 B
836 B
key, title, status, since, supersedes, superseded-by, rule, signals, mechanics
| key | title | status | since | supersedes | superseded-by | rule | signals | mechanics |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| process.one-worktree-one-committing-agent | 2026-07-21 — One worktree, one committing agent (#542) | active | 2026-07-21 | none | none | Never run two committing agents concurrently on one worktree — give each parallel slice its own worktree branched off the feature branch and merge back. | parallel agents · concurrent commits · worktree per slice · read-only review agent · paths: n/a · issues: #542 | `git worktree add` a fresh tree per slice off the feature branch; merge the slices back into the feature branch when they land. |
Read-only review agents sharing a tree are fine — the constraint is on writers. Sequence slices only where one genuinely depends on another's output; "backend-first narrow, SPA-wide after" worked well for #216.