From e83e323148e1c4295233a25b1375f661cc65fbef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Craig Jennings Date: Thu, 28 May 2026 01:55:16 -0500 Subject: docs(todo): clarify what blocks the iteration-history backfill TODO The earlier body listed two reasons to wait: a file-conflict block (correct, since spec-review.org and spec-response.org have uncommitted edits) and a guess that the entry-shape spec might still change (inference without evidence). The revised dependency drops the guess. The read-only research portion can run in parallel without touching the files. --- todo.org | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/todo.org b/todo.org index cd07172..6d63109 100644 --- a/todo.org +++ b/todo.org @@ -1200,7 +1200,7 @@ Files to update: Investigation: search =.ai/sessions/=, =.ai/notes.org=, inbox archive, and git log for mentions of these workflow docs. Identify review/response/design iterations, dates, and contributors (including agents where known: Claude Code, Codex, local models). Distinguish high-confidence history (commits, dated session entries) from inferred (chat-only context). Recommend whether enough evidence exists to populate the section, and draft the entries if so. -Dependency: do not start until the spec-review/spec-response WIP is committed. The requirement itself is still being finalized. +Dependency: spec-review.org and spec-response.org have uncommitted edits in flight. Wait for those to land before writing to the files. The read-only research portion (search sessions, identify iterations, draft entries to a scratch file) can run in parallel without conflict. :PROPERTIES: :LAST_REVIEWED: 2026-05-28 -- cgit v1.2.3