diff options
| author | Craig Jennings <c@cjennings.net> | 2026-06-21 23:49:26 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Craig Jennings <c@cjennings.net> | 2026-06-21 23:49:26 -0400 |
| commit | ed27e3c760bdc924edcba85bc99ed083df484086 (patch) | |
| tree | c27d289dd31035edd55dc68ac68d9d0adb1db628 /scripts/lint.sh | |
| parent | 98ebb2f37d6dba1c5864d49744e8adb8c392c589 (diff) | |
| download | rulesets-ed27e3c760bdc924edcba85bc99ed083df484086.tar.gz rulesets-ed27e3c760bdc924edcba85bc99ed083df484086.zip | |
refactor: fold spec review findings into the spec itself
The spec-review/spec-response pair wrote findings to a sibling <spec>-review.org file that spec-response deleted once processed. The deletion left the iteration-history Artifacts line dangling and dropped the verbatim review. Keeping the file instead collided with spec-response's file discovery and its "no review files remain" done-condition.
Findings now live in the spec under a * Review findings section as TODO tasks with a [/] cookie, the same shape * Decisions already uses. The reviewer records findings there. The responder completes each in place (accept and modify finish DONE, reject finishes CANCELLED with the reason), and the readiness rubric gates on the cookie. A scope-expanding response re-runs the rubric and files any new obligation as a finding or decision before claiming Ready, because resolving every finding can still introduce unreviewed assumptions.
Also folds in two reviewer-practice principles: keep review and response roles explicit, and cite the source for external-dependency facts in a finding. Updates spec-create.org and the workflow INDEX so the trio describes one convention.
Diffstat (limited to 'scripts/lint.sh')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions
