| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Every org document an agent writes carried `#+AUTHOR: Craig Jennings & Claude`. No template stamps that line. Agents copy it from a neighboring file, so one stray header propagates through everything generated afterward.
My own repos tolerate the co-author line. Employers whose policy is that work product carries employee names alone do not. An `#+AUTHOR:` line survives conversion into docx, a wiki page, or a PDF that reaches a customer.
I rewrote the header to `Craig Jennings` across the workflows, templates, specs, and design docs. The rule now lives in commits.md, so the next generated document starts correct rather than inheriting the mistake.
Archived session logs keep their original headers as a record of what happened. The two Codex-authored design docs keep their byline, because Codex wrote them and relabeling would be a false attribution rather than the removal of one.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Phase 1 of the docs-lifecycle build. claude-rules/docs-lifecycle.md captures the shape: formal-vs-notes location split (docs/specs/ vs docs/design/), an authoritative org-keyword status heading with dated history and an :ID: UUID, the two-sequence keyword header that keeps decision cookies computing, named owners for every transition, and the one-grep status board.
The four workflows each take their piece: spec-create emits into docs/specs/ and stamps DRAFT in the template; spec-review checks location (legacy spots stay reviewable until :LAST_SPEC_SORT: is stamped) and owns the DRAFT-to-READY flip plus the demote path; spec-response owns READY-to-DOING at decomposition, stamps :SPEC_ID: on the build parent, and always emits the flip-to-IMPLEMENTED task; task-audit reconciles DOING specs against their bound parent's keyword.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Phase 0 of the autonomous-batch (speedrun) build. todo-format.md now carries fixed cross-project definitions: :solo: is the autonomy/eligibility tag (buildable, agent-verifiable, no design deliberation — at most one or two quick upfront-answerable decisions, which the speedrun pre-flight Q&A batches), and :quick: is a ≤30-minute effort hint that never gates eligibility. task-review and task-audit now treat the tag assessment as mandatory — a pass that skips it is incomplete.
task-review's :solo: gate 3 also moves from "no upfront decision" to the no-deliberation form: the stricter wording predated the pre-flight Q&A decision and would have wrongly excluded tasks with a quick answerable question.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
A parent whose child tasks are all resolved closes (DONE/CANCELLED + CLOSED) and archives on the next --archive-done; a parent with one or two open children gets those promoted to standalone level-2 tasks first. Carries the leaf-with-notes carve-out (a task whose only descendant is a dated design note is unstarted work, not a finished container — flag NEEDS-USER, never close) and a warning to verify open-child counts against a real subtree scan, not a fragile regex. Depends on --convert-subtasks running first so the counts are accurate.
From the .emacs.d handoff (2026-07-01 task-audit note).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Reconciliation keeps each task honest on its own, but a single effort fragmented across several tasks (the agent-agnostic work, say) is hard to see and finish as a whole. Adds Phase C.5: read the open-task set, spot semantic clusters by judgment rather than a brittle keyword match, and propose per cluster either a merge (fold same-work members into one) or a parent-with-children grouping (related-but-distinct members). Proposes, never applies, until Craig picks; broader than Phase C's exact-duplicate fold.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017PtX1nt1rtYVATuzmzBS4f
|
| |
|
|
| |
Two Phase C behaviors, both surfaced auditing an Emacs-config todo.org. Enforce a project's declared closed tag set (strip tags outside it) where the legend marks the set exhaustive, leaving open-vocabulary projects untouched. For a task whose code shipped but awaits a manual or visual check, file that check under the project's manual-testing parent (dedup first) and close the implementation task, rather than letting "done but unverified" linger half-open.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Every run appended a fresh dated "lint-org follow-ups" section with line-number-keyed entries, so the follow-ups file grew an unbounded pile of near-duplicate sections, kept entries whose finding had since resolved, and broke whenever the target file's line numbers shifted. Running an audit against a large todo.org surfaced exactly that drift: dead-link flags pointing at docs that now exist, and three stacked dated runs for one file.
Now lint-org rewrites the current file's section from the current run. Findings that no longer reproduce simply are not re-emitted, re-runs dedupe to one section, and entries key on checker plus message with the line as a trailing annotation, so a finding survives line shifts as the same entry. Other files' sections are left intact, and the strip step tolerates the old dated-header shape so existing follow-ups files migrate on first run. This changes the follow-ups file from an append-only log to the current outstanding findings per file.
task-audit's Phase C link-hygiene step now also reaps a matching dead-link entry when it fixes or verifies the link, scoped strictly to dead-link entries, so the audit and the follow-ups file stop drifting between lint runs.
Five follow-ups tests cover record-by-content, dedupe across runs, drop-on-resolve, and preserve-other-files. Mirrors synced.
|
| |
|
|
| |
A task audit verified the surviving tasks are factually honest but left their relevance and priority untouched, so keeping the list lean still needed a separate task-review run. Added Phase F: after the audit stamps :LAST_AUDIT:, run task-review on the oldest-unreviewed batch in the same pass. The two stay distinct (audit owns facts and :LAST_AUDIT:, review owns relevance and the per-task :LAST_REVIEWED:); chaining just refreshes both markers in one invocation. open-tasks does not invoke task-review, so nothing there needed to change. Mirror synced.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Two changes land together because each is broken without the other.
open-tasks.org gains a new Phase A.1, evaluated only in Next Mode. The
phase reads :LAST_AUDIT: from notes.org and walks five state signals
(reminder/task mismatch, passed scheduled date, "waiting on X" matches a
shipped X, dead file: link, sub-task >75% DONE coverage). If the temporal
threshold of 14 days trips, or any signal fires, Next Mode offers a
task-audit run before producing the recommendation. Item 1 in the offer
is "run task-audit first" per the recommendation-at-item-1 convention.
task-audit.org gains two pieces. Phase C now enforces priority and
type-tag presence per the project's legend, applies the [#A] dating rule
from that legend, and re-assesses :quick: and :solo: from reconciled
facts. Unambiguous calls land autonomously. Ambiguous ones flag
NEEDS-USER instead of being guessed. A new Phase E stamps :LAST_AUDIT:
on completion.
|
| |
|
|
| |
The .ai/ mirror lagged claude-templates/.ai/ for three workflows (task-audit, task-review, triage-intake) and two scripts (screenshot.py and its test) — earlier commits updated the canonical copies without resyncing the mirror in the same commit. The startup rsync caught it up; this commit tracks the result so the two stay identical.
|
|
|
A task audit reconciles each open task's recorded content against reality (sessions, email, chat, ticketing, calendar, recordings) and fixes the stale facts. That's distinct from task-review, which grooms relevance and priority. The two compose: review keeps the list lean, and audit keeps the survivors factually honest. Registered it in the workflow INDEX with its trigger phrases.
|
