Record v0.11 publication evidence

[flyingrobots]

Summary

Records post-publication evidence for the published v0.11.0-alpha.1 prerelease.

• Marks the v0.11 release notes and structured release policy as published.
• Records the immutable tag object, peeled merge commit, GitHub release URL, workflow run IDs, milestone closure, zero release assets, and no-crates publication evidence.
• Updates release-process docs, the release-process test plan, README, ROADMAP, and CHANGELOG so current-truth surfaces no longer describe v0.11 as release prep.
• Tightens release_policy_tracks_v0_11_boundary to require the published evidence fields.

Refs #109.
Refs #110.

RED/GREEN

RED:

• cargo test -p xtask release_policy_tracks_v0_11_boundary failed while the guard still expected status = "publish_ready" after the policy moved to published evidence.

GREEN:

• cargo test -p xtask release_policy_tracks_v0_11_boundary
• cargo test -p xtask release_
• cargo xtask contract-check
• markdownlint-cli2 README.md ROADMAP.md CHANGELOG.md 'docs/**/*.md'
• cargo xtask verify

Notes

This PR does not move or mutate the immutable v0.11.0-alpha.1 tag. It records evidence on main after publication, following the existing v0.10 post-publication pattern.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 56f29c98-5fe5-4fd1-b55b-4959b5191a0e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3eb71f6 and c8303c8.

📒 Files selected for processing (8)

• CHANGELOG.md
• README.md
• ROADMAP.md
• docs/releases/v0.11.0-alpha.1.md
• docs/topics/release-process/README.md
• docs/topics/release-process/policy.toml
• docs/topics/release-process/test-plan.md
• xtask/src/main.rs

📜 Recent review details

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Path-based instructions (3)

**

⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file

**: # AGENTS

Git Rules

NEVER amend git commits. Make a new commit instead.

NEVER use git rebase unless the user explicitly approves a rare exception.
Use regular merge commits.

NEVER force any git operation. If a force operation appears necessary, stop and
explain what happened and what options remain.

NEVER create draft pull requests.

NEVER use a codex prefix in branch names, PR titles, or commit messages.

Pull request bodies for issue work MUST include GitHub auto-close text such as
Closes #123`` for every issue the PR is intended to close.

Think

Think is durable memory for cross-session coordination.

• Use codex-think --remember --json when starting a new session, changing into
  this repository, or regaining context after a context shift.
• Use codex-think "..." --json when a cycle closes or a significant event
  should survive across turns.
• Treat Think as memory, not repo truth. Anchor strong claims back to files,
  commits, commands, issues, or pull requests.
• Claude memories are read-only. Use claude-think --remember --json only for
  additional context.

Topic Shelves

docs/topics/ contains the living contract graph for landed behavior. Topic
shelves are not proposals, retrospectives, or design archaeology.

Each shelf may contain:

• README.md: what is true in HEAD.
• test-plan.md: how those truths are verified, including requirements, cases,
  fixtures, oracles, implemented evidence, planned cases, and known gaps.
• architecture.md: optional structure or dataflow notes when the machinery
  earns a separate page.
• rationale.md: optional still-relevant tradeoffs and rejected approaches.

When To Update Topic Shelves

For every nontrivial behavior, contract, workflow, release, schema, validation,
or public-surface change:

1. Identify the owning topic shelf before editing code.
2. If no shelf owns durable behavior, create one.
3. Update test-plan.md before or alongside tests with requirement IDs, case
   IDs,...

Files:

• CHANGELOG.md
• ROADMAP.md
• xtask/src/main.rs
• docs/topics/release-process/test-plan.md
• docs/topics/release-process/policy.toml
• docs/topics/release-process/README.md
• README.md
• docs/releases/v0.11.0-alpha.1.md

docs/topics/**/test-plan.md

📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)

docs/topics/**/test-plan.md: Update a topic shelf test-plan.md before or alongside tests with requirement IDs, case IDs, fixtures, oracles, implemented evidence, planned cases, and known gaps.
Mark planned cases as implemented only when executable evidence exists.
Do not use policy rows in topic-shelf test plans to avoid writing behavior tests for software behavior.
Negative tests in topic-shelf test plans should assert stable error kinds or structured artifacts, not merely is_err() or diagnostic text.
For nontrivial behavior, contract, workflow, release, schema, validation, or public-surface changes, update the owning topic test-plan.md with planned requirement and case rows before or alongside the first test.
Mark planned rows as implemented only after executable evidence exists.

Files:

• docs/topics/release-process/test-plan.md

docs/topics/**/README.md

📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)

docs/topics/**/README.md: Topic shelf README.md files must describe only what is true in HEAD.
Update the topic shelf README.md only after the behavior exists in the branch; do not describe intended future behavior there.
Do not churn topic-shelf README files for purely mechanical edits that do not change a contract.

Files:

• docs/topics/release-process/README.md

🔇 Additional comments (12)

docs/topics/release-process/policy.toml (1)

436-453: LGTM!

xtask/src/main.rs (1)

3342-3395: LGTM!

docs/releases/v0.11.0-alpha.1.md (3)

5-6: LGTM!

---

22-29: LGTM!

---

111-145: LGTM!

docs/topics/release-process/README.md (2)

75-76: LGTM!

---

99-112: LGTM!

docs/topics/release-process/test-plan.md (1)

73-73: LGTM!

CHANGELOG.md (1)

11-15: LGTM!

README.md (2)

605-605: LGTM!

---

657-660: LGTM!

ROADMAP.md (1)

443-453: LGTM!

---

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation

  • Updated release notes and status pages to reflect that v0.11.0-alpha.1 is now published.
  • Added publication details such as release links, timestamps, and verification evidence.
  • Reworded guidance from “release prep” to “published release” language.

• Chores

  • Synced release-tracking records and validation expectations with the published release state.
  • Updated milestone and workflow references to match the completed release process.

Walkthrough

All files recording the v0.11.0-alpha.1 release are updated from "release-prep" to "published" status. policy.toml gains full publication metadata fields. The xtask test boundary assertion is updated to match. Release notes, process docs, and prose files (CHANGELOG.md, README.md, ROADMAP.md) are reworded accordingly.

Changes

v0.11.0-alpha.1 Publication Record

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Policy contract + xtask assertions docs/topics/release-process/policy.toml, xtask/src/main.rs	policy.toml v0_11_0_alpha_1 entry updated from publish_ready to published with full metadata (timestamps, URLs, hashes, CI run IDs, milestone/crates.io flags); release_policy_tracks_v0_11_boundary test expectations updated to match every new field.
Release notes and process docs docs/releases/v0.11.0-alpha.1.md, docs/topics/release-process/README.md, docs/topics/release-process/test-plan.md	Release notes status block, publication metadata section, and verification/evidence sections replaced from pre-publication prep to post-publication evidence; process README entry and test-plan fixture row updated to "published" wording.
Prose files CHANGELOG.md, README.md, ROADMAP.md	CHANGELOG Unreleased/Changed entry added; README "What exists today" and timeline sentences reworded; ROADMAP entry status updated to published with release URL and commit hash.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• flyingrobots/edict#110: Directly precedes this PR — introduced the v0.11.0-alpha.1 publish_ready policy entry and golden metadata that this PR now flips to published.
• flyingrobots/edict#80: Same pattern applied to v0.10.0-alpha.1 — flips release_policy_tracks_v0_10_boundary to published with identical evidence field schema.
• flyingrobots/edict#61: Another instance of the same release-finalization flow — policy.toml entry and xtask assertion updated from publish_ready to published for an earlier alpha.

Poem

🏷️ The tag was cast, immutable, sealed,
The evidence gathered, the milestone revealed.
publish_ready yields — published now stands,
Hashes and run IDs inscribed by sure hands.
The train has moved on; the record remains.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title is concise and accurately captures the main change: recording v0.11 publication evidence.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is clearly aligned with the changeset and summarizes the publication-evidence updates and related doc/test changes.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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

[flyingrobots]

@codex review please

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 85745d02c5

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[flyingrobots]

Self-Audit Finding

Cc: @codex

ID	Severity	Source	File	Lines	Issue
SELF-001	P5	Self	xtask/src/main.rs	~3399	cargo xtask verify failed because the newly added README release-status guard was not rustfmt-formatted.

I will fix this as a separate commit without amending history, then rerun the full local gate.

[flyingrobots]

Code Lawyer Activity Summary

ID	Source	Severity	File	Commit	Outcome
1	PR	P3	README.md	40f3966	Updated the top-level “What exists today” v0.11 bullet from release-prep to published and added readme_marks_v0_11_release_notes_as_published.
2	PR	P3	ROADMAP.md	55b7a3a	Added the v0.11 GitHub Release URL and peeled tag commit to match the published-release artifact shape; added roadmap_records_v0_11_published_release_artifacts.
SELF-001	Self	P5	xtask/src/main.rs	5f5b2cd	Applied rustfmt to the new release guard after cargo xtask verify caught cargo fmt --all --check drift.

RED:

• cargo test -p xtask readme_marks_v0_11_release_notes_as_published failed on the stale README release-prep bullet.
• cargo test -p xtask roadmap_records_v0_11_published_release_artifacts failed on the missing v0.11 ROADMAP release URL.
• cargo xtask verify failed on cargo fmt --all --check before the rustfmt-only follow-up.

GREEN:

• cargo test -p xtask readme_marks_v0_11_release_notes_as_published
• cargo test -p xtask roadmap_records_v0_11_published_release_artifacts
• cargo test -p xtask release_
• cargo xtask contract-check
• markdownlint-cli2 README.md ROADMAP.md CHANGELOG.md 'docs/**/*.md'
• cargo fmt --all --check
• cargo xtask verify

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Summary

• Updated the README “What exists today” release-status list so v0.11.0-alpha.1 is consistently described as published. README.mdL605-L608
• Added the published v0.11 GitHub release URL and peeled tag commit to the roadmap artifact map. ROADMAP.mdL443-L452
• Committed the follow-up as 5d6f6a0 Record v0.11 published roadmap status and created the PR record.

Testing

• ✅ cargo fmt --all --check && cargo xtask verify
• ⚠️ codex-think --remember --json (environment limitation: codex-think was not installed in the container)

View task →

[flyingrobots]

Self-Audit Finding

Cc: @codex

ID	Severity	Source	File	Lines	Issue
SELF-002	P2	Self	xtask/src/main.rs	~3394-3426	The follow-up guards added in the prior pass assert README/ROADMAP prose directly. That violates the repo rule that tests must not pass merely because prose contains a phrase.

I will remove the prose-only guards in a separate commit, keep the documentation fixes, and rerun the full local gate.

[flyingrobots]

Code Lawyer Activity Summary — Follow-Up Pass

ID	Source	Severity	File	Commit	Outcome
1	PR	P3	README.md	40f3966	Updated the top-level “What exists today” v0.11 bullet from release-prep to published.
2	PR	P3	ROADMAP.md	55b7a3a	Added the v0.11 GitHub Release URL and peeled tag commit to match the published-release artifact shape.
SELF-001	Self	P5	xtask/src/main.rs	5f5b2cd	Applied rustfmt to the new release guard after cargo xtask verify caught cargo fmt --all --check drift.
SELF-002	Self	P2	xtask/src/main.rs	c8303c8	Removed the follow-up prose-only README/ROADMAP guards; release evidence remains covered by structured policy.toml assertions and local docs checks.

RED:

• cargo test -p xtask readme_marks_v0_11_release_notes_as_published failed on the stale README release-prep bullet.
• cargo test -p xtask roadmap_records_v0_11_published_release_artifacts failed on the missing v0.11 ROADMAP release URL.
• cargo xtask verify failed on cargo fmt --all --check before the rustfmt-only follow-up.
• bash -lc '! rg -n "fn (readme_marks_v0_11_release_notes_as_published|roadmap_records_v0_11_published_release_artifacts)" xtask/src/main.rs' failed while the invalid prose-only guards existed.

GREEN:

• bash -lc '! rg -n "fn (readme_marks_v0_11_release_notes_as_published|roadmap_records_v0_11_published_release_artifacts)" xtask/src/main.rs'
• cargo test -p xtask release_
• cargo xtask contract-check
• markdownlint-cli2 README.md ROADMAP.md CHANGELOG.md 'docs/**/*.md'
• cargo fmt --all --check
• cargo xtask verify

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Summary

• Removed the two prose-only follow-up guards from xtask/src/main.rs; the v0.11 structured release-policy guard now flows directly into the existing changelog/policy consistency test without README/ROADMAP phrase assertions in between. xtask/src/main.rsL3389-L3403
• Committed the change as aebd96b Remove prose-only release guards.
• Created the PR record with title Remove prose-only v0.11 follow-up guards.

Testing

• ✅ cargo test -p xtask release_
• ✅ cargo xtask verify
• ⚠️ codex-think --remember --json (warning due to environment limitation: codex-think is not installed in the container)
• ⚠️ codex-think "Removed prose-only README/ROADMAP xtask guards from PR follow-up and committed aebd96b after cargo test -p xtask release_ and cargo xtask verify passed." --json (warning due to environment limitation: codex-think is not installed in the container)

View task →

[flyingrobots]

Code Lawyer Re-Audit Summary

ID	Source	Severity	File	Commit	Outcome
PRRT_kwDOS96-Us6NTrh5	PR	P3	README.md	40f3966	Already fixed and resolved; v0.11 status list now says published.
PRRT_kwDOS96-Us6NTrh9	PR	P3	ROADMAP.md	55b7a3a	Already fixed and resolved; v0.11 roadmap entry now records release URL and peeled tag commit.
SELF-001	Self	P5	xtask/src/main.rs	5f5b2cd	Already fixed; rustfmt drift removed.
SELF-002	Self	P2	xtask/src/main.rs	c8303c8	Already fixed; prose-only release guards removed.
REAUDIT-001	Self	P0-P5	n/a	n/a	No new actionable issues found in this pass.

Verification in this re-audit:

• git status --porcelain: clean
• git fetch origin: succeeded
• Full GraphQL review-thread query: 2 threads total, 0 unresolved
• git diff origin/main...HEAD: reviewed; no new actionable issues found
• cargo test -p xtask release_: pass
• cargo xtask contract-check: pass
• markdownlint-cli2 README.md ROADMAP.md CHANGELOG.md 'docs/**/*.md': pass
• cargo xtask verify: pass
• gh pr checks 111: stable/MSRV pass; CodeRabbit pass

Merge judgment remains governed by the strict Code Lawyer gate: CI and CodeRabbit are green, review threads are resolved, but the PR does not have two approvals.