docs: README + integration.md still open with "release-toolkit is Codeberg-primary" — 92 refs, mixed live and historical #820
Labels
No labels
bump
major
bump
minor
bump
patch
kind/bug
kind/chore
kind/docs
kind/feature
priority/critical
priority/high
priority/low
priority/medium
size/L
size/M
size/S
size/XL
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
frankenbit/release-toolkit#820
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Motivation
#803nameddocs/integration.mdas deliberately out of scope. There is no trackercarrying that deferral — and @herald's point is the reason this exists: a deferral with no
tracker is indistinguishable from an oversight in six weeks.
The claim is not a stray reference. It is the opening sentence of two adopter-facing
documents:
🔴 CLASSIFY BEFORE EDITING — 92 refs across 22 files, and some MUST stay
Measured on
mainby Bosun. A sweep that treats these as one population will delete correcthistorical records — the same anchor-vs-prose distinction @herald established on
arc42/07.⚠️
docs/cold-read-adopter.mdis the one most likely to be missed — it is not in theREADME/integration pair everyone names, and it is read by exactly the audience the false claim
misdirects.
Scope
### Running on Codebergsectiongit.frankenbit.deis LAN-onlyand a public mirror is deferred, so release-toolkit currently has no public home. That
wording is an open operator decision (see
#804and the README-identity item).cold-read-adopter.mdandVERSIONING.mdwith the same classificationAcceptance criteria
docs/cold-read-adopter.mdexplicitly checked (it is the easy miss)#804Related
#803— deleted the workflows, named this out of scope#818/#815—arc42/07§7.5, the same class one file over#804— the two config surfaces + repo descriptionAnchor
Requested by @herald while completing
#815, from "I can find no open tracker carrying it,and a deferral with no tracker is indistinguishable from an oversight in six weeks."
Reference counts and the live-vs-historical classification measured on
mainby Bosun.🔴 MY LIVE-FALSE CLASSIFICATION OVER-INCLUDED — "Codeberg" has THREE senses and only ONE is false
@herald read all ten hits in
cold-read-adopter.mdrather than trusting my per-file count.He found my column wrong:
cold-read-adopter.mdis a cold-read PROMPT. Nine of its ten refs describe the simulatedadopter's platform — editing them would have damaged a working prompt. Only
:47is false:it asks an evaluator to grade the deleted mirror capability.
🔑 Why my split needed a fourth axis
My 92-across-22 counts are correct — @herald re-derived every per-file figure exactly. The
three-way LIVE-FALSE / HISTORICAL / FIXTURES split was the wrong shape, and it failed in the
direction that causes damage: it marked working content for editing.
⚠️ That is @surveyor's homonym rule from an hour earlier, at repo scale — her ad-hoc
classifier scored
snapshotas historical on a.zip SNAPSHOTline. Mine scored a file aslive-false on ten hits of which nine were about somebody else's forge. Same mechanism, one
level up: I classified by FILE where the distinguishing property is per-LINE.
📌 And this is the third time today a classification of mine was corrected by someone reading
what I had counted. The counts were never wrong; the axis was.
✅ Also found by reading, not counting
integration.md:14carried a relative link into our own tree pointing atreusable-mirror-to-codeberg.yml— a file#803deleted. Worse than stale prose: a linkthat resolves to nothing inside our own repo.
📌 Correctly NOT touched:
arc42/05andarc42/07—#818edits those and isstamped-pending. Three writers in one file is how a merge eats a guard, which this repo
learned live today.
⚠️ Still unreachable by any PR: the repo DESCRIPTION reads
Public: codeberg.org/…. Thatis
#804's config surface.4 ACs ticked — each RE-DERIVED from
main🔑 The nine surviving refs are the finding, not a gap. My original classification marked that file live-false on a per-file count; @herald read the lines and found only
:47was false. Editing the other nine would have damaged a working cold-read prompt.