Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
null 8b2e4121dd docs(tracker): the milestone naming this template teaches truncates on the card
forgejo-issue.py warns that a milestone title starting with a version token has
everything after it dropped from the dashboard phase -- `0.2 Payments` displays
as `0.2`. README.md was teaching exactly that form, and two adopted repos
followed it: Closer-Couples and fruit-fall both carry version-first titles and
lose their batch names on the card. PrivacyLLC-Web uses `Batch 05 — ...` and
displays whole.

The guidance now names the working form, and carries the comma rule the script
also enforces: a comma breaks the `milestones=` filter and the card shows the
wrong next action.

WORK_CYCLE.md gains the trap the same script documents and no document did: the
dashboard's next action is the NEWEST open issue in the current milestone, not
the most severe -- severity labels have no influence at all. Filing a routine P2
into the active batch silently replaces what the project card shows.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-17 22:49:23 -05:00
null 912c470bbb docs(template): the owner is _null
README.md's status header named a person; it now names _null.

healthcheck.sh's crontab example hard-coded one operator's home directory in
two lines. Those are now $HOME, rather than a literal /home/_null, because a
template copied into every project should not carry anyone's home path and an
invented one would be a path that does not exist -- which this tree refuses
everywhere else.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-17 22:47:56 -05:00
null da8e457e97 fix(docs): two documents claimed files that must not exist
doc-claims.sh could not run on this tree until the previous commit, and its
first run found both immediately.

docs/data/README.md illustrated the wrong place to put an asset by naming
`docs/data/logo.webp` in backticks. A backticked path is a claim the file
exists, so the example of where NOT to put a file asserted that a file was
there. Reworded to name the two directories instead, both of which exist.

project-readme-template.md linked docs/architecture/Engineering_Reference_Manual.md,
a document the template does not ship and most projects will never write. It
now points at docs/architecture/README.md, which every scaffolded project has,
and says to name a reference manual beside it once there is one.

Left unfixed, every project adopting this template would inherit a red
doc-claims from its first day, and a permanently red gate is one everybody
learns to ignore -- audit-gate.mjs makes that argument at length about npm
advisories, and it applies here.

This is the third instance this session of one shape: a document that
describes an absent or forbidden path becomes an assertion that it exists.
The others were docs/planning/FUTURE.md in BATCH_LEDGER.md and an `Exempt:`
line inside a code fence.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-17 22:45:35 -05:00
null 6965915dbd chore(repo): put the template under version control
The basis for every project here was itself unversioned: no .git, no remote,
no history. Changes to it had no diff and no revert, and two of its own guards
could not run at all -- doc-claims.sh and doc-triggers.py both read git
history, so the script written to catch documentation drift could not be run
against the documents that define drift.

This is the tree as it stands, including work that until now existed only as
loose files on disk: WORK_CYCLE.md, TOOLS.md, the Portainer image-line fix in
deploy.py, the status vocabulary corrected to the four words the conformance
checker actually enforces, the Exempt: mechanism documented, and the Forgejo
instance named in README.md.

secrets.sh --tracked reports one candidate, migrate.sh:480. It is the comment
documenting the three Postgres credential shapes that script redacts, with
literal placeholders, and it is left alone deliberately: GUARDS.md section 2
is that a source-grep guard must tell code from the comment about code, and
deleting an explanation to quiet a scanner is the failure it names.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-17 22:44:26 -05:00