docs(rfc): rfc 0028 — build-feedback program (drafted)

[jensholdgaard]

The measured build-feedback program (maintainer precedence instruction, 2026-07-06; data in epic #382). Order follows the data: harness consolidation first (104 test binaries are the link storm), core types-vs-config split second, parquet split behind a re-measure tripwire, nextest last. Honest framing included: incremental checks are already 17–38 s; the wins are links, branch churn, and hub fan-out — in that order.

Proposed §5 follows as a comment for the specified sign-off.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[jensholdgaard]

Proposed §5 for the specified sign-off

Scenario ids RFC0028.<m>.

Scenario RFC0028.1 — consolidation preserves the test inventory.

• Given the pre-consolidation cargo test -p <crate> -- --list inventory
• When the crate's harness consolidation lands
• Then the post-consolidation inventory contains the identical test names (modulo the harness path prefix)
• And no test body changed in the move

Scenario RFC0028.2 — isolation-sensitive tests stay isolated.

• Given the slice-1 inventory of tests requiring process isolation (crash-recovery SIGKILL, env-mutating)
• Then each remains its own binary, annotated with the reason

Scenario RFC0028.3 — the probe set improves.

• Given the epic Epic: build-feedback program — test-harness consolidation, crate splits, nextest (RFC 0028) #382 probe set re-run after slices 1–2
• Then touch core -> cargo test -p ourios-querier --no-run drops below 30 s
• And full workspace cargo test wall time drops ≥ 30%

Scenario RFC0028.4 — core split is behavior-free.

• Given the ourios-config extraction
• When the full workspace suite runs
• Then results are identical pre/post split
• And a MinerConfig edit no longer rechecks type-only core consumers

Scenario RFC0028.5 — CI parity.

• Given the consolidated harnesses + nextest
• Then CI runs the identical suite inventory and stays green

(§6: inventory diffs are the mechanism — --list snapshots committed per slice; probe numbers recorded in epic #382.)

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@jensholdgaard, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 40 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 843c8c6d-03a7-44e0-9055-597ed926753d

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between eb28c7c and a1327b8.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• docs/SUMMARY.md
• docs/rfcs/0028-build-feedback-program.md

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch rfc0028-draft

---

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.}

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Adds RFC 0028 documenting a measured “build-feedback” program to reduce developer feedback latency, and links it into the mdBook navigation.

Changes:

• Add new draft RFC 0028 describing the test-harness consolidation plan, ourios-core decomposition, a parquet split tripwire, and nextest adoption.
• Update docs/SUMMARY.md to include RFC 0028 in the RFC list.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
docs/SUMMARY.md	Adds RFC 0028 to the mdBook table of contents.
docs/rfcs/0028-build-feedback-program.md	Introduces the draft RFC describing the build-feedback program and its proposed slices.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.