Conversation
…rows (Amara Govern-stage 1/2) Amara's 4th ferry (PR #221 absorb) named populating docs/CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md as the Govern-stage action: the schema has existed since PR #166 but the Resolved table was empty despite multiple session-observed contributor-level disagreements that closed with evidence. Backfills three genuine contributor-level conflicts observed this session (narrow scope — not maintainer-directives, which are out-of-scope per the schema's contributor-level disagreement definition): - CC-001: Copilot (PR reviewer) vs Aaron on no-name-attribution rule scope (history-file exemption). Resolved in Aaron's favor via Otto-52 clarification; policy BACKLOG row filed in PR #210. - CC-002: Amara (4th ferry) vs Otto (pre-Otto-67 pattern) on Stabilize-vs-keep-opening-new-frames. Resolved in Amara's favor; Otto pivoted at Otto-68 to execute her roadmap; 3/3 Stabilize + 3/5 Determinize landed via PRs #222/#223/#224/#225/#226. - CC-003: Codex (PR reviewer) vs Otto (initial framing) on citing-absent-artifacts. Resolved in Codex's favor via fix commits 29872af/1c7f97d on PRs #207/#208; pattern now discipline (distinguish merged-on-main from proposed-in-PR-open). All three rows follow the schema's 8-column layout and include the full Resolution-so-far / Scope / Source cells the schema requires. No retroactive Aaron→human-maintainer sweep of prior rows; schema's rule 1 (resolutions are additive) honored. This is 1/2 of Amara's Govern-stage work. 2/2 is the authority-envelope + escalation-path ADR (deferred, M-effort). Part of Amara's 4-stage remediation roadmap (Stabilize → Determinize → Govern → Assure). Otto-75 tick.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Backfills the previously-empty Resolved section of docs/CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md with three session-observed contributor-level conflicts and their recorded resolutions.
Changes:
- Adds three resolved conflict entries (CC-001..CC-003) to the Resolved table.
- Removes the “empty at creation” placeholder line under the Resolved section.
| | ID | When | Topic | Between | Positions | Resolution-so-far | Scope | Source | | ||
| |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | ||
| | CC-001 | 2026-04-23 | No-name-attribution rule scope — does it apply to tick-history, MEMORY.md, BACKLOG attribution lines, and similar historical-record surfaces? | `Copilot` (PR reviewer) vs `Aaron` | `Copilot`: flagged direct "Aaron" references in tick-history row on PR #208 as violations of the `docs/AGENT-BEST-PRACTICES.md` no-name-attribution rule. `Aaron`: *"'No name attribution in code, docs, or skills' in history files are files like memory backlog and other things like that for historical purposes"* — history files are EXEMPT because they record who-said-what historical reality. | **Resolved 2026-04-23 in Aaron's favor.** History-file class (tick-history, `memory/**`, BACKLOG attribution lines, hygiene-history, ROUND-HISTORY, research logs) exempt from the rule; forward-looking surfaces (code, skills, governance docs, persona files outside `memory/persona/**`, user-facing docs, module bodies) still bound. Policy clarification BACKLOG row filed (PR #210) for documenting the exemption explicitly in `docs/AGENT-BEST-PRACTICES.md`. | **Scope:** distinguishes historical-record surfaces from forward-looking ones. Does NOT relax the rule for code / skills / governance. Does NOT authorize retroactive `Aaron → human maintainer` sweep of existing historical rows. | Aaron chat Otto-52 + PR #210 `docs/BACKLOG.md` row "Name-attribution policy clarification (history-file exemption)" + Copilot P1 finding on PR #208 | | ||
| | CC-002 | 2026-04-23 | Stabilize (operational closure) vs keep-opening new research/BACKLOG rows — where should Otto's next round of effort land? | `Amara` (external AI maintainer, via 4th ferry) vs `Otto` (pre-Otto-67 pattern) | `Amara`: *"The single best strategic fix is to stop using prose as both the storage layer and the control plane... Merge and mechanize the operating model you already have before you let the system grow another layer of meta-structure."* `Otto`: pre-Otto-67 pattern was filing new absorbs + BACKLOG rows + memory captures without corresponding mechanization pass. | **Resolved 2026-04-23 in Amara's favor.** Otto pivoted after Otto-67 absorb (PR #221) to Stabilize-stage items: decision-proxy-evidence schema (PR #222), snapshot-pinning (PR #223), live-state-before-policy rule (PR #224), memory-reference-existence lint (PR #225), memory reconciliation algorithm design (PR #226). 3/3 Stabilize + 3/5 Determinize landed. | **Scope:** covers the specific period Otto-59 → Otto-67 where new-substrate opens outpaced mechanization-of-existing. Does NOT rule out future absorbs or BACKLOG additions — those are legitimate when substrate warrants. Does rule out "keep opening new frames instead of closing on existing ones" as an ongoing posture. | `docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-memory-drift-alignment-claude-to-memories-drift.md` (PR #221 absorb) + Otto-68..74 Amara-roadmap execution PRs (#222/#223/#224/#225/#226) | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Source field references docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-memory-drift-alignment-claude-to-memories-drift.md, but that file does not exist under docs/aurora/ in this branch. Please either update this citation to the correct existing Aurora absorb file (e.g., the relevant docs/aurora/2026-04-23-...*.md that contains the referenced content) or add the missing document so the reference resolves.
| |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | ||
| | CC-001 | 2026-04-23 | No-name-attribution rule scope — does it apply to tick-history, MEMORY.md, BACKLOG attribution lines, and similar historical-record surfaces? | `Copilot` (PR reviewer) vs `Aaron` | `Copilot`: flagged direct "Aaron" references in tick-history row on PR #208 as violations of the `docs/AGENT-BEST-PRACTICES.md` no-name-attribution rule. `Aaron`: *"'No name attribution in code, docs, or skills' in history files are files like memory backlog and other things like that for historical purposes"* — history files are EXEMPT because they record who-said-what historical reality. | **Resolved 2026-04-23 in Aaron's favor.** History-file class (tick-history, `memory/**`, BACKLOG attribution lines, hygiene-history, ROUND-HISTORY, research logs) exempt from the rule; forward-looking surfaces (code, skills, governance docs, persona files outside `memory/persona/**`, user-facing docs, module bodies) still bound. Policy clarification BACKLOG row filed (PR #210) for documenting the exemption explicitly in `docs/AGENT-BEST-PRACTICES.md`. | **Scope:** distinguishes historical-record surfaces from forward-looking ones. Does NOT relax the rule for code / skills / governance. Does NOT authorize retroactive `Aaron → human maintainer` sweep of existing historical rows. | Aaron chat Otto-52 + PR #210 `docs/BACKLOG.md` row "Name-attribution policy clarification (history-file exemption)" + Copilot P1 finding on PR #208 | | ||
| | CC-002 | 2026-04-23 | Stabilize (operational closure) vs keep-opening new research/BACKLOG rows — where should Otto's next round of effort land? | `Amara` (external AI maintainer, via 4th ferry) vs `Otto` (pre-Otto-67 pattern) | `Amara`: *"The single best strategic fix is to stop using prose as both the storage layer and the control plane... Merge and mechanize the operating model you already have before you let the system grow another layer of meta-structure."* `Otto`: pre-Otto-67 pattern was filing new absorbs + BACKLOG rows + memory captures without corresponding mechanization pass. | **Resolved 2026-04-23 in Amara's favor.** Otto pivoted after Otto-67 absorb (PR #221) to Stabilize-stage items: decision-proxy-evidence schema (PR #222), snapshot-pinning (PR #223), live-state-before-policy rule (PR #224), memory-reference-existence lint (PR #225), memory reconciliation algorithm design (PR #226). 3/3 Stabilize + 3/5 Determinize landed. | **Scope:** covers the specific period Otto-59 → Otto-67 where new-substrate opens outpaced mechanization-of-existing. Does NOT rule out future absorbs or BACKLOG additions — those are legitimate when substrate warrants. Does rule out "keep opening new frames instead of closing on existing ones" as an ongoing posture. | `docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-memory-drift-alignment-claude-to-memories-drift.md` (PR #221 absorb) + Otto-68..74 Amara-roadmap execution PRs (#222/#223/#224/#225/#226) | | ||
| | CC-003 | 2026-04-23 | PR citations of paths / PRs / artifacts that don't yet exist at the reviewed commit SHA — is the citation valid? | `Codex` (external PR reviewer) vs `Otto` (initial framing) | `Codex`: flagged on PRs #207, #208 that paths like `docs/craft/subjects/production-dotnet/module.md` cited as "landed" were not present in the reviewed commit's tree — "stop citing absent artifacts as merged sources." `Otto`: initial framing was that cross-PR citations are OK because the cited artifact "will exist once the sibling PR merges." | **Resolved 2026-04-23 in Codex's favor.** Otto's fix commits (29872af on PR #207, 1c7f97d on PR #208) rewrote citations to distinguish *merged-on-main* (citing commit SHA) from *proposed-in-PR-#N-open* (citing PR number + explicit "not yet on main" marker). Pattern now discipline: never cite as "landed" artifacts not in the reviewed commit's tree. | **Scope:** applies to PR descriptions, in-tree docs, BACKLOG rows. Does NOT prohibit cross-PR references — those are fine with explicit PR-pending annotation. Does NOT retroactively require fixing every prior session PR that assumed future state. | Codex P2 findings on PR #207 + PR #208; fix commits referenced above; Aaron `docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-decision-proxy-technical-review.md` PR #219 absorb reinforces ("live-state-before-policy" rule applies same discipline to settings changes) | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Source field cites docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-decision-proxy-technical-review.md, but there is no such file under docs/aurora/ in this branch. Please correct this reference to the actual in-tree absorb document that contains the cited material, or add the missing file; otherwise this new row introduces a broken cross-reference.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…directive) (#228) Aaron 2026-04-23: "can you start building first class codex support with the codex clis help, it might eventually be benefitial to switch otto to codex later depending on which modeel/harness is ahead. this is basically the same ask as a new session claude first class experience, this is a codex session as a first class experince. and really the code one is a first class claude code experience, we also even tually will have first class claude desktop cowork and claude code desktop too. backlog" The row captures the full roster of first-class harness experiences Aaron wants Zeta to support symmetrically (Claude Code CLI, NSA, Codex CLI, Claude Desktop cowork, Claude Code Desktop) with Codex CLI being the new-ask focus. Lays out a 5-step execution shape (research tick → parity matrix → gap closures → bootstrap doc → Otto-in-Codex test run → harness- choice ADR) so the Architect or a future loop tick can pick up any stage independently. Distinguishes from the existing cross-harness-mirror-pipeline row: that row handles skill-file distribution to multiple harnesses; this row handles session-operation parity (every Otto operation must work in Codex CLI equivalently). Grounded in the retractability-by-design foundation (Otto-73) extended to harness-choice — portability-by-design for the agent session, not just the substrate. Scope limits explicit: no committed harness swap today; no duplication of cross-harness mirror work; no lock-in to any one harness family. Harness-choice ADR is explicitly revisitable per Aaron's "depending on which modeel/harness is ahead". Priority P1 — strategic not urgent. Research tick (S) within 5-10 ticks; full integration L spread across next rounds. Otto-75 tick follow-up (PR #227 Govern-stage backfill closed the primary tick; this row captures the fresh directive that landed mid-tick).
Merged
4 tasks
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed (#229) Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
AceHack
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
…-class directive absorbed Otto-75 tick closed with two substrate landings: - PR #227 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill (3 resolved rows: CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron, CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto, CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto). Amara Govern-stage 1/2. - PR #228 — BACKLOG row for first-class Codex-CLI session experience. P1, mid-tick directive absorb. 5-harness first- class roster + 5-stage execution shape. Split-attention tick: foreground Govern-stage work + mid-tick directive absorb both landed same tick without dropping either. Tick-close row follows standard schema: timestamp + session pointer + SHA + tick body + PRs + 4 observations. Observations highlight: (1) populating CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS IS the Govern-stage work (substrate-closing, not just substrate- opening); (2) split-attention model working under load; (3) Aaron's 5-harness roster formalizes portability-by-design at session layer (retractability-by-design + portability-by-design = optionality as design principle); (4) BACKLOG row's skill- file-distribution vs session-operation-parity distinction is load-bearing for harness-swap optionality.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
docs/CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.mdResolved table with 3 session-observed contributor-level conflicts that closed with evidence; schema has existed since PR hygiene: row #54 — backlog-refactor cadenced audit (Aaron 2026-04-23) #166 but sat empty.The 3 backfilled rows
Scope discipline
Rule discipline
Resolution-so-farcaptures the current state with date markers.Aaron → human maintainersweep of prior historical rows (CC-001's scope explicitly disallows it).Remaining Amara Govern-stage work (2/2)
Test plan
Otto-75 tick.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code