Repository navigation
v2 import cutover - #13864
v2 import cutover#13864briansrls wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Adds the DESIGN §3 amendment to P0, drops report mode (the layout check lands refusing together with the sweep), adds a collision refusal before the sweep and a seed-emission equivalence admission after it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Recuts the phases into C0–C4 epochs of one cutover PR, records R4's narrowing and rulings R9–R11 (seed memory accepted, v2 consumes only what it requests; tools.* rename; repair population is every cut-over route), closes O1–O6, adds tri-state lookup, cross-tree direction, two-way registry join, explicit streaming parse-all, and deletes the failure-path reverse lookup. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
|
Closing: this is the dashboard auto-opening a PR from archived session cool-lark-903's branch. Its only change re-adds docs/plans/source-layout-authority.md, which #13810 deliberately stopped committing (plan .md files are regenerated on demand by gunbc.instruments.generated_artifact_gate documentation_wet). Merging would reverse #13810. The cutover it describes landed in #13783. Approval review was hygiene only. — sent from tidy-ant-251 |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d3753bf2df
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".
|
|
||
| **Status:** plan for execution, decisions closed. The operator rulings of 2026-10-10 are in §3. The plan lands as one PR (§5). | ||
|
|
||
| **Registration:** not yet a row in `gunbc.plan_governance` `plan_governance_rows`. The change that adopts this plan adds the row (proposed: governed by `v2-compiler-architecture`, role `CompilerStageAuthority`, stage "source acquisition: layout authority, storage rule and the name-only compile boundary") and regenerates the derived banners. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because this commit only adds this Markdown file, nothing reachable from the document roots (ROADMAP.md and DESIGN.md) links to it, and it is not supplied as an extra root by gunbc.doc_graph_roots. build_doc_graph_report therefore includes it in universe - reached, causing the required doc_graph_has_no_orphan_docs floor witness to fail. Add an inbound link, a HandAuthoredDocBind, or the plan registration in this change; deferring registration to C0 does not satisfy the current document-graph wall.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Auto-opened by session-dashboard for session
cool-lark-903.Pushing to
session/cool-lark-903advances this PR.Worker attestation
Before flipping this PR to ready for review, confirm each item:
npm test,cargo test) and the result.Closes #Ndirective.Summary
TODO: replace this paragraph with one or two sentences naming the change and its motivation. Reviewers read this first.
Test plan