coulomb/approval-engine
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Record GH-DEC-2026-005; strike the spent G3 revisit trigger

Browse source 
Gate House confirmed all three requested dispositions as GH-DEC-2026-005
(GH-IN-0002, closed); flex-auth accepted as FLEX-DEC-2026-006. The
approval-claim is the step-1 artifact, ActionAuthorization is not
required and MUST NOT be served from the claim endpoint, and a PEP
validates across the claim and the step-2 DecisionEnvelope. Gate House
recorded the split as doctrine rather than convenience -- a PIP must not
republish the PDP's decision -- and struck the provenance.authority ==
state-hub requirement explicitly. This engine's claim schema is
unchanged.

Correct the deferred option D trigger list. The G3 trigger was written
conditional on G3 being settled by composition; flex-auth reports
FLEX-WP-0019 closed it by adding a lifetime field to DecisionEnvelope on
2026-09-02, so a decision now states its own end without borrowing
ActionAuthorizationValidity. That was the one structural thing the bundle
did that the split does not, so the trigger is not merely spent -- it
resolved against ratification. Struck with reasons; a future revisit
needs a fresh argument. The trigger came from a stale row in a dated
2026-08-29 review record that flex-auth does not rewrite.

Also record the root cause of the bad authority constant: it came from a
flex-auth fixture, not prose. A contract whose examples contradict its
prose will be implemented as its examples.

Close APPROVAL-IN-0002. Docs only; 84 tests pass.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TvyJPAaVCGsVheVhcCwNND

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 411227@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: d566f6d3-bcaf-43c3-bc5e-3ddd0f64b535
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-09-06 01:36:03 +02:00
parent 54ced98b84
commit 564534dbcb
4 changed files with 61 additions and 8 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

18
docs/approval-consumption.md
View file

@ -70,7 +70,17 @@ republished to consumers. The consumer checks in
[`approval-claim.md`](approval-claim.md) ("Required verification") are the
supported validation path.
Reconciling the two envelopes is a cross-repo contract change under
`GH-DEC-2026-003`, not a unilateral edit here. Until it is decided, this engine
keeps serving the approval-claim shape and does not emit a `state-hub`
authority it does not have.
**Settled 2026-09-06 by `GH-DEC-2026-005`** (with `FLEX-DEC-2026-006`). The
approval-claim is the step-1 artifact; `ActionAuthorization` is not required on
this path and **MUST NOT** be served from the claim endpoint. A PEP validates
across two artifacts: the claim for the approval fact, and the step-2 flex-auth
`DecisionEnvelope` for exact `CheckRequest` match and the policy pin.
Gate House recorded the split as doctrine rather than as an implementation
convenience: each artifact is validated against the layer that owns its data,
and **a PIP MUST NOT republish the PDP's decision**. The
`provenance.authority == "state-hub"` requirement was struck explicitly — State
Hub is a read model holding no runtime approval authority, so a validator
requiring it fails closed against every correctly issued claim.
This engine's claim schema is unchanged by the ruling.