Skip to content

docs: propose bounded workflow runtime - #484

Draft
djm81 wants to merge 1 commit into
codex/lean-requirements-evidencefrom
codex/workflow-01-turn-orchestration
Draft

djm81 wants to merge 1 commit into
codex/lean-requirements-evidencefrom
codex/workflow-01-turn-orchestration

Conversation

@djm81

@djm81 djm81 commented Sep 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Refs #483; paired story: nold-ai/specfact-cli#742.

Propose the module-owned specfact workflow runtime, independent producer adapters, local receipts and bounded implement/fix/PR repair in workflow-01-turn-orchestration. This is planning only: proposal, design, normative deltas, unchecked implementation tasks and validation record. It introduces no runtime or release changes.

Standalone verification is read-only and needs no prior receipt. Producer reports/outcomes remain independent; exact input identity is separate from run identity. Loops retain three implementation iterations/five PR rounds, explicit timeouts, recovery/no-progress/head-change handling and separate CI/review completion. Receipts are local progress, never historical proof or CI authority.

Before runtime Requirements integration or adopting #483, validate the exact signed #481 publication, schema-v3 current_execution, installed identities and compatibility with actual core/workflow versions. Missing/unsigned/incompatible/v2-only producers are not ready. Projection remains independent; core #740 owns its policy cutover.

This PR stacks on codex/lean-requirements-evidence (#482) to keep the diff limited to harness-owned artifacts and workflow sections in INTEGRATION/CHANGE_ORDER. R09 changes and issue ownership remain in the lean-delivery PRs. Retarget after the base integrates.

Validation: strict OpenSpec1.13.0, scoped Markdown and whitespace pass. Applicable signature/version/format/import hooks pass. The existing owner-authorized planning-only local Block2 exception remains disclosed: normal Requirements checks on these planning artifacts reject unsupported-sidecar-schema; this is not a passing Requirements/review/CI claim. Remote gates and protections are unchanged.

Native issue metadata: User Story, djm81, enhancement/openspec/change-proposal, SpecFact CLI project1 Todo. Delivery chain remains modules #481 -> modules #483 -> core #742 runtime adoption; optional preflight, full graph and generic skill installation are not blanket blockers. Implementation and issue closure remain subsequent work.

Paired planning PRs: core #743, modules #484.

Keep harness planning separate from lean evidence delivery. Define exact
signed Requirements v3 compatibility, independent producer outcomes,
read-only verification and bounded resumable local/PR loops.

Strict OpenSpec, scoped Markdown and whitespace pass. Retain the existing
owner-authorized planning-only Block2 exception for these unchanged
planning artifacts; legacy sidecar failure is not a green gate.
@djm81 djm81 added enhancement New feature or request openspec openspec change change-proposal Proposal for a new change labels Sep 20, 2026
@djm81 djm81 self-assigned this Sep 20, 2026
@djm81 djm81 added the change-proposal Proposal for a new change label Sep 20, 2026
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Sep 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Important

Draft PR not reviewed

Draft PRs are not automatically reviewed by default.

  • Trigger a manual review

To automatically review draft PRs, update your CodeRabbit configuration:

reviews:
  auto_review:
    drafts: true

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

change-proposal Proposal for a new change enhancement New feature or request openspec openspec change

Projects

Status: Todo

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant