Skip to content

docs(r3): refresh §3 T-Debt-Paydown lane row (#1862) - #1911

Merged
briansrls merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/r3-plan-debt-paydown-row-1862
May 6, 2026
Merged

briansrls merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/r3-plan-debt-paydown-row-1862

Conversation

@briansrls

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Updates docs/r3-program-plan.md §3 T-Debt-Paydown (standing) snapshot: PR #1807 is merged (was incorrectly labeled OPEN); cites landed #1892 (DP1) and #1903 (§S4 receipt); leaves #1566 DRAFT rollup open; blocker column names gate #75 DECLARED + T-LBP COMPLETE as cross-lane gate for downstream S4 substrate work.

Debt receipt (R3 standing program)

(3) No debt touched — plan table delta only (no ROADMAP row retirement).

Test plan

  • Docs only.

Cycle: #1862 · session quiet-otter-416.

Made with Cursor

Replace stale OPEN marker for merged SG-0 discipline PR; cite landed DP1 and
§S4 receipt PRs; keep #1566 DRAFT rollup + gate #75 DECLARED + T-LBP cross-lane gate.

Debt receipt (R3 standing program): (3) No debt touched — plan delta only.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@briansrls

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Review metadata

  • Provider / model: cursor / composer-2
  • Commit: 28be0722 · Trigger: schedule
  • Comparison: origin/main @ 5b124946 ... review/pr-1911-28be0722 @ 28be0722
  • Thinking: 14s wall

Findings: None. This diff only updates one row in docs/r3-program-plan.md (408:408). It does not touch substrate, compiler code, or tests. INVARIANTS.md, docs/modeling-discipline.md, CODING.md, and TESTING.md do not impose rules on this kind of program-plan bookkeeping; nothing here suggests fail-closed, boundary discipline, or testing violations.

Spot-check: the new pointer to §1.8 gate #75 pr_anticipation_discipline_ci_active DECLARED matches the §1.8 ledger row for gate 75 in the same document (274:274), so the cross-reference is internally consistent.

Verdict: APPROVE — Narrow docs-only refresh; lane row aligns with the §1.8 ledger; no rubric violations in the diff.

@briansrls

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

quiet-otter-416 — cursor api-review (28be0722)

Spot-checked origin/chore/r3-plan-debt-paydown-row-1862:

  • §3 row T-Debt-Paydown — single-row delta only; no Rust / .dag / tests.
  • Gate Lane A tasks #75 consistency: §1.8 table row | 75 | pr_anticipation_discipline_ci_active | … | DECLARED … matches the §3 blocker cell citing pr_anticipation_discipline_ci_active DECLARED — internal cross-ref holds.

Finding: None — APPROVE stands; no fix commit.

— sent from quiet-otter-416

@briansrls briansrls left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review metadata

  • Provider / model: codex / unknown
  • Commit: 28be0722 · Trigger: schedule
  • Thinking: 127s wall

Non-blocking — Strengths

  • docs/r3-program-plan.md The row refresh is documentation-only and keeps T-Debt-Paydown tied to concrete receipts plus the active §1.8 gate without reopening locked R3 lane structure.

✅ No blocking concerns.

@briansrls
briansrls merged commit 2c7d820 into main May 6, 2026
4 checks passed
@briansrls
briansrls deleted the chore/r3-plan-debt-paydown-row-1862 branch May 6, 2026 23:48
@briansrls

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Verified against current main: docs/r3-program-plan.md §3 T-Debt-Paydown row remains documentation-only and anchored to concrete receipts + §1.8 closure authority as intended. The scheduled Codex review contained no findings requiring code or doc changes — strengths-only, zero blocking items — so no follow-up commit.

— sent from quiet-otter-416

@briansrls

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Re-verified: same Codex scheduled review (28be0722) — strengths-only, zero blocking items. No code/doc delta vs main; nothing to commit.

Prior verification reply (same substance): #1911 (comment)

— sent from quiet-otter-416

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant