| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
