aa1d805e04
This repository is the one the template's README describes: 205 issues, zero
milestones, and severity labels spelled "P0 Critical" / "P1 High" / "P2 Medium",
which privacyllc.dev reports as NOT ADOPTED rather than as 87% complete.
Six markdown records described the same work and none pointed at the tracker.
Two of them said the project was in "Phase 5" while the code was at 0.9.3.
Migrated, then deleted in this commit:
FUTURE.md -> docs/history/BATCH_LEDGER.md (Archived). Its open
items were all already filed as issues, so nothing
needed migrating into the tracker
HISTORY.md -> docs/history/DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md, verbatim, 0 lines lost
DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md -> the same file, as a second labelled block. Not
interleaved: the changelog has three duplicated version
headings, so one date order would have implied more
than the record supports
PROJECT.md -> docs/planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md
STRUCTURE.md -> the agent pipeline into README.md; its versioning rules
retired
BUILD_SUMMARY.md -> BATCH_LEDGER.md. Its embedded SQL schema deliberately
NOT carried: it predated the UNIQUE constraint on
leads.email, and server/index.js owns the schema
SCRIPTS.md -> docs/TOOLS.md, corrected for the SSR + prerender build
Moved with history (git detects all four as renames):
OVERHAUL_PLAN.md, review.md, project-requirements.md, docs/zoho-setup.md
Kept because this project earned them: the five-agent pipeline, the design
system in OVERHAUL_PLAN.md (Status: Current, with a front-note saying which half
is history), the positioning argument in REDESIGN_REVIEW.md, and REQUIREMENTS.md
whole, including its change policy.
Deleted from the template because they do not apply, each said out loud in
DOC_TRUST_MAP.md: QA pass I (no money moves), the authorisation checklist group
and the session-token row (no accounts, no sessions), and one PRECAUTIONARY
paragraph in SECURITY.md about holding credentials on behalf of users — there
are none, and PROJECT_PLAN.md records accounts as out of scope. Pass H was kept
and rewritten: its authorisation half does not apply, its what-a-stranger-can-
reach half is the most exposed surface here.
Also removed: main.js, the old static site's hash router, referenced by nothing
and preserved in .drop/; and test-results/.last-run.json, a May Playwright
artifact reading {"status":"failed"} for a suite that does not exist.
The repository was made private on Forgejo before this commit. That is what let
the internal history be committed rather than exempted — null/fruit-fall is
already private and reports normally.
Two defects found on the way in and fixed here: zoho-setup.md told admins to
edit `server/zoho/`, a directory that has never existed in any commit (the
mapping is in server/index.js), and README.md's route list still advertised
/8x8, removed at 0.6.6, while omitting /privacy-policy.
Branding: icon.webp and logo.webp converted from this project's own marks in
assets/. banner.webp is absent and is filed as an issue rather than faked.
Verified: verify.sh 3/3, doc-claims 71 claimed paths all present, backup and a
first-ever restore of the live leads database (2 tables, 3 rows, under 1s).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| OVERHAUL_PLAN.md | ||
| README.md | ||
| REDESIGN_REVIEW.md | ||
README.md
Design — Queue North Website
Status: Current
Owner: _null
Last reviewed: 2026-08-18
Governs: docs/design/**
Review trigger: Any new user-facing surface, or a change to the product's tone
Documents here
Two, and they answer different questions. Both predate the template and both are this project's own writing.
| Document | Owns |
|---|---|
OVERHAUL_PLAN.md |
what it looks like — Tailwind theme tokens, the numeric-typography rule (Georgia for all numeric content), the type scale, section spacing and container sizes, radius/shadow/border rules, which shadcn-style primitives to use, the per-page layout blueprints, and the explicit anti-patterns. Its earlier Migration Phases and Agent Plan sections are history; the brief onward is live |
REDESIGN_REVIEW.md |
what it sounds like — the B2B positioning argument, the messaging shift from "interesting technical person" to "reliable communications and IT partner", and the anti-patterns of tone. The eleven open content issues in Batch 12 are defects measured against this |
The single most load-bearing sentence across both: business buyers purchase risk reduction, not technology. Copy that reads as clever costs trust here in a way it would not on a developer-facing product.
What belongs here
What it should feel like, and the decisions behind that:
- Product decisions — what the user can do, in what order, and what happens when they get it wrong. The error states are design, not an afterthought.
- UI plans — screens, states, and what each one is for. Include the empty state and the loading state; they are the two most people see first and the two most often left undesigned.
- Copy — the actual words. Interface text is a design surface, and writing it late means writing it badly.
- Tone — how this product talks. One paragraph is enough, and it settles a hundred small arguments.
What does not belong here
- How it is built — that is
docs/architecture/ - Scope and audience — that is
docs/planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md
Include the rejected version
For any decision that was genuinely close, record what was not chosen and why. Without it, the same option gets proposed every few months and re-argued from nothing.