docs(rfc): rfc 0028 §5/§6 — build-feedback program specified

[jensholdgaard]

What

RFC 0028 lands its §5 acceptance criteria and §6 testing strategy — status drafted → specified, maintainer sign-off 2026-07-06 (the scenarios were proposed in a #383 comment and approved in-session).

The five scenarios: inventory-preserving consolidation (.1), an explicit isolation-exempt list (.2), the probe-set gates — core→querier-tests < 30 s and full cargo test ≥ 30% faster against the epic #382 baseline (.3), a behavior-free ourios-config extraction (.4), and CI suite parity (.5).

§6 makes inventory diffs the mechanism: cargo test -- --list snapshots per consolidation PR, the reviewer checks a pure path-prefix rename; probe numbers land next to the baseline in epic #382.

Invariants / hazards

CLAUDE.md §6.2 (tests are specifications) is the load-bearing constraint this RFC exists to respect: consolidation moves tests, never weakens them, and .1's inventory diff is the reviewer's proof.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Updated the RFC status to reflect its current stage.
  • Expanded the testing guidance with clearer, step-by-step scenarios.
  • Added instructions for preserving test coverage, keeping isolation-sensitive tests separate, checking timing behavior, validating config split expectations, and confirming CI parity.
  • Included practical notes on comparing test lists and running spot checks after configuration changes.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

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

Next review available in: 3 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: 30076b6f-c241-49c6-951d-fb3248cfe932

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between dda6147 and a8fcc8e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

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

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR updates RFC 0028's status metadata from "drafted" to "specified" and expands its testing strategy section with five detailed, numbered acceptance scenarios covering test inventory preservation, isolation requirements, timing, behavior-free config extraction, and CI parity.

Changes

RFC 0028 Documentation Update

Layer / File(s)	Summary
RFC status and testing strategy revision docs/rfcs/0028-build-feedback-program.md	Status metadata changed from drafted to specified; testing strategy section replaced with scenario-based requirements (RFC0028.1–RFC0028.5) covering test inventory, isolation, timing, config extraction validation, and CI suite parity.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The PR description covers the change, but it does not follow the required template sections and omits the Summary, Related, and Checklist entries.	Add the missing Summary, Related, and Checklist sections, including issue/RFC links and completion status for the required checks.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly identifies the RFC 0028 §5/§6 update and the status change to specified.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

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

---

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

Moves RFC 0028 from drafted to specified by adding concrete §5 acceptance criteria and a §6 testing strategy for the build-feedback program (test-harness consolidation + workspace decomposition), aligned with the RFC lifecycle.

Changes:

• Updates RFC status to specified.
• Specifies five acceptance scenarios (RFC0028.1–.5) covering inventory preservation, isolation exceptions, probe improvements, behavior-free config extraction, and CI parity.
• Defines an inventory-diff–driven testing strategy tying each scenario to reviewable evidence.

---

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

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.