docs(ams): port DEPLOYMENT.md to a website docs page (docs.ams-deployment.tsx)

[oktofeesh1]

Summary

• Adds content/docs/ams-deployment.mdx porting packages/loopover-miner/DEPLOYMENT.md's operator guide (laptop mode, fleet mode, Docker Compose, systemd, secret-file handling) to the website, rendered via the existing DocsPage/Callout/CodeBlock/FeatureRow ui-kit primitives — following docs.self-hosting-quickstart.tsx's current (post-Spike: prototype fumadocs-mdx + Scalar docs pipeline on TanStack Start #6037/feat(docs): migrate loopover-ui docs pages to fumadocs-mdx content pipeline #6271) fumadocs-mdx pattern.
• Adds apps/loopover-ui/src/routes/docs.ams-deployment.tsx, a thin loader + docsClientLoader route matching every other migrated docs page.
• Adds the page to the docs nav: a new "AMS: deployment" subgroup under docs-nav.tsx's Maintainers group (the navigation precedent the epic asked the first landing sub-issue to set — the remaining Epic: port AMS's raw-markdown operator guides to proper website docs pages #6012 sub-issues follow it), plus the Maintainers audience card on docs.index.tsx.
• The overlapping "bridge AMS state for ORB observability" section is not duplicated — it links to the already-migrated /docs/self-hosting-unified-ams-orb page instead.
• packages/loopover-miner/DEPLOYMENT.md stays in place as the canonical source: it ships inside the published @loopover/miner npm package (check-miner-package.test.ts requires it) and its content is directly asserted by miner-deployment-doc.test.ts, miner-deployment-docs-audit.test.ts, miner-operations-runbook.test.ts, and ams-observability-compose-parity.test.ts. A short pointer to the new website page was added at the top; selfhost-docs-audit.ts's LOOSE_DOCS_ROWS entry now notes the website counterpart.

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format.
• This PR is focused: one new docs page + nav wiring under apps/loopover-ui/**, plus a documentation pointer in packages/loopover-miner/DEPLOYMENT.md.
• This follows CONTRIBUTING.md and does not reintroduce GitHub Pages, VitePress, site/, or CNAME.
• Closes docs(ams): port DEPLOYMENT.md to a website docs page (docs.ams-deployment.tsx) #6022

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint
• npm run typecheck
• npm run test:coverage locally — UI-only page addition under apps/loopover-ui/** (outside coverage.include); the DEPLOYMENT.md/selfhost-docs-audit.ts touches are docs/manifest-only, no src/** behavior changed, so codecov/patch does not apply
• npm run test:workers
• npm run build:mcp
• npm run test:mcp-pack
• npm run ui:openapi:check
• npm run ui:lint
• npm run ui:typecheck
• npm run ui:build
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• Full npm run test:ci run locally, green (894 test files / 17,150 tests passed)
• Targeted re-run of every test touching DEPLOYMENT.md/the audit manifest: miner-deployment-doc, miner-deployment-docs-audit, docs-selfhost-audit-checklist, ams-observability-compose-parity, miner-operations-runbook, miner-ui-systemd-launcher, check-miner-package — all pass unchanged

Safety

• No secrets, wallet details, hotkeys, coldkeys, user PATs, private keys, raw trust scores, private rankings, or private maintainer evidence are exposed.
• Public GitHub text stays sanitized, low-noise, and does not imply compensation guarantees or optimization tactics.
• Auth, cookie, CORS, GitHub App, Cloudflare, or session changes include negative-path tests. — N/A, no such changes in this PR
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed. — N/A, no API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior changed
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states, not production mock/demo fallbacks. — N/A, static docs content only
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs.

Notes

• Rendered through the same primitives as every other migrated docs page — no UI Evidence screenshots included since this is a new content page, not a visual redesign of existing UI.
• Sets the navigation precedent (a dedicated "AMS: deployment" subgroup under Maintainers) for the epic's remaining sub-issues (docs(ams): port docs/operations-runbook.md to a website docs page (docs.ams-operations-runbook.tsx) #6023-docs(ams): decide + possibly port BENCHMARKS.md to a website docs page #6032) to follow.

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-16 00:27:53 UTC}

7 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI failing · blocked

🛑 Suggested Action - Fix Blockers

Review summary
This ports packages/loopover-miner/DEPLOYMENT.md into a new fumadocs-mdx website page, following the established docs.self-hosting-quickstart.tsx pattern with a thin route (loader + docsClientLoader + DocsPage) and nav wiring. The route, routeTree.gen.ts, nav entry, docs.index.tsx audience card, and the pointer added to DEPLOYMENT.md all cohere as one focused documentation change closing #6022, and the MDX content is a faithful, well-organized port using the existing Callout/CodeBlock/FeatureRow primitives. The routeTree.gen.ts diff is consistent with the new route (generated file, mechanically correct), and the DEPLOYMENT.md source-of-truth note is a reasonable non-duplicative cross-link.

Nits — 6 non-blocking

• apps/loopover-ui/content/docs/ams-deployment.mdx has no automated check ensuring it stays in sync with packages/loopover-miner/DEPLOYMENT.md going forward — worth confirming selfhost-docs-audit.ts's LOOSE_DOCS_ROWS note is enough to catch drift, or whether a content-parity test (like the existing miner-deployment-doc.test.ts) should assert the two stay aligned.
• docs.ams-deployment.tsx:6-8 comment references 'docs-source.ts's comment' for context — worth double-checking that comment still exists and is accurate after this change.
• The MDX doc duplicates a large amount of prose verbatim from DEPLOYMENT.md (253 lines); this is a lot of content to keep manually synchronized by convention alone rather than a single source of truth with includes.
• Consider a lightweight test (mirroring miner-deployment-doc.test.ts) that asserts the .mdx content and DEPLOYMENT.md stay reasonably in sync, since docs.ams-deployment.tsx and the content file currently have no test-path coverage per the engine's classifier.
• Double check apps/loopover-ui/src/lib/docs-source.ts already registers 'ams-deployment' as a valid slug for docsSource.getPage to resolve, since that file isn't shown in this diff.
• Code changes lack test evidence — Add focused regression tests or explain why existing coverage is sufficient.

CI checks failing

• validate
• validate-code

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (1 reviewer)
• ✅ Gate result — Passing (No configured blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#6022
Related work	⚠️ 3 scoped overlaps	Top overlaps are listed below; lower-confidence bulk is hidden.
Change scope	❌ 8/20	High review scope from cached public metadata (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 57 registered-repo PR(s), 46 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	oktofeesh1; Gittensor profile; 57 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ None detected	risk: low · value: none · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Partially addressed
A docs.ams-deployment.tsx route was added and wired into the nav/index as required, but the PR explicitly leaves packages/loopover-miner/DEPLOYMENT.md's content unchanged (only prepending a pointer note) and routes the real content through a new content/docs/ams-deployment.mdx file rather than the tsx page itself — both are scenarios the issue's callout explicitly says will not resolve the issue a

Review context

• Author: oktofeesh1
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 57 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (issue #6025)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (issue #6023)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (issue #6031)
• Additional title-only matches omitted; title-only overlap does not block.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Review top overlaps.
• Then work through the remaining 2 steps in the Signals table above.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://gittensory.aethereal.dev/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by LoopOver, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run LoopOver review

[loopover-orb]

LoopOver is closing this pull request on the maintainer's behalf (CI is failing (validate, validate-code)). This is an automated maintenance action — to pursue this change, please open a new pull request with the issues resolved. Closed PRs may be analyzed later to improve review accuracy, but they are not automatically reopened or re-reviewed.