| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
| |
Folded the spec-review in. The router now delivers each routable keeper to the destination's inbox via inbox-send and lets that project's own process-inbox file it, instead of a new atomic cross-repo todo.org move. Superseded D2 (move helper) and D3 (hand-stamped provenance, now inbox-send's for free); added D7 (inbox-send delivery), D8 (ROUTE_CANDIDATE marker stamped at process-inbox file time), D9 (local source removal with the reject flow as undo). Rewrote summary, goals, mechanics, phases, and acceptance to match. Decisions [9/9], status Ready. Review file consumed and removed.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Reviewed the approved wrap-up routing spec; rubric Not ready, two blocking findings. The central one: route keepers via the existing inbox-send path to the destination's inbox and let its own process-inbox file them, rather than the spec's new atomic cross-repo todo.org move. inbox-send already provides the provenance the direct-move design reinvents, the destination files through its own value gate, and a verified precondition (chime and yt-sync have inbox/ but no todo.org) reverses the spec's assumption. Second finding pins the candidate-set marking to a tag stamped at process-inbox file time. Review file carries the analysis and drop-in implementation tasks.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
All six decisions resolved. The router's input is filed keepers that belong to another project, not raw inbox files (Reading B). That keeps it a separate sub-step from the inbox gate (D1) and distinct from the defer-and-stage router (D5). Transcript routing is deferred to vNext (D4).
I reworked the design to match: the input definition, a candidate-set note bounding the router to session-filed keepers rather than the standing backlog, and Phase 3. The cookie reads [6/6] and the Status moved to ready for review.
The A-vs-B input ambiguity was the root under D1 and D5. Reading B keeps the inbox gate, the router, and defer-and-stage each simple instead of entangling all three.
|
|
|
A spec for the optional wrap-up step that routes inbox items (and, vNext, transcripts) to the project they belong to. Three decisions settled from grounding (reuse todo-cleanup's Open Work matcher as the destination anchor, move atomically through one helper, keep cross-project writes visible with a provenance note); three left open for Craig (separate router step vs merged into the inbox sanity check, transcript scope and trigger, reconciling with the defer-and-stage router). Five implementation phases, acceptance criteria, readiness dimensions.
Status stays draft while decisions are open. The todo task moves to DOING and links the spec.
From the archsetup handoff 2026-06-13.
|
