Skip to content

Specify the Git-diff review confirmation Workflow Bundle #38

Open

Description

@Sandstorm831

Question

What exact launch inputs, Routing, git-worktree-root placement, structured git diff Command invocation and per-platform parameters, structured findings schema, and subset-selection Human Gate should define a no-write Workflow Bundle that reviews the diff between two Git refs, now that Git is expressed through ordinary Command steps and the Bundle contract is fixed?

Activity

  1. Sandstorm831 commented on Aug 29, 2026

    @Sandstorm831
    CollaboratorAuthor

    Starting context

    Superseding inputs (2026-09-05): Read the Review checkpoint amendment and Bundle-contract amendment after the original linked resolutions. A Repeat group now requires a Bundle-authored review cadence/message, there is no launch-time interval or trust-revocation action, External Bundle uninstall removes its grant, and built-in Bundle removal remains undecided.

    Input Why it matters Authority
    Chart Crucible's architecture and migration strategy Destination, planning scope, canonical terms, and standing constraints on routings, Bundles, and software-project workflows Canonical map
    Decide which Git operations Crucible performs for a Workflow and where they sit in the routing Governing decision: no Git Step kind or public Module; use ordinary Commands or Harness behaviour, declare git-worktree-root where required, and apply only generic trust and recovery Canonical decision
    Choose Crucible's genericity-proof workflow The original no-write confirmation-workflow candidate: diff two refs, produce findings, then let a Human Gate select a subset Canonical starting concept
    Define the minimum generic Workflow capabilities Uniform Step Interface, linear Routing, Command Verdict and output semantics, artifact types, prompt handoff, and the parked subset-selection gate; its provisional Git family is superseded by the Git decision above Canonical decision with named supersession
    Define the self-contained Workflow Bundle contract and trust model Strict manifest, structured PATH command invocation, platform overrides, script/schema assets, artifact validation, and trust summary; its fixed-precondition and Git-write details are superseded by the Git decision above Canonical decision with named supersession

    Required methods

    • /grilling
    • /domain-modeling
    • /codebase-design

    Reading rule

    Read the Git decision first and do not design a Git-read Step kind, Git Module, special Git permission, or Git-specific recovery. Then read the confirmation-workflow candidate, followed by the generic Workflow and Bundle contracts. This ticket specifies one concrete Bundle—its inputs, Routing, portable Command, artifacts, schema, and gate—not new runtime semantics. Do not answer Harness capability semantics, persistence, or TUI presentation.

  2. self-assigned this
    on Aug 29, 2026
  3. Sandstorm831 commented on Sep 7, 2026

    @Sandstorm831
    CollaboratorAuthor

    Not required for v1

    This ticket is not a v1 prerequisite. The resolved sequencing decision, Sequence vertical slices, refactoring gates, and legacy deletion, keeps it open as a planning ticket outside the M0 to M6 sequence and schedules it after M6, with the Matt Bundle as the one v1 built-in. The handoff approval, Approve Crucible's architecture and migration handoff, confirmed it is not a prerequisite for M0 to M6.

    It stays open and context-ready for a later effort; nothing in v1 blocks on it.

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

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

wayfinder:context-readyWayfinding ticket has curated starting context and may be claimedwayfinder:grillingHITL grilling decision ticket

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions