tegwick
b3280df742
CANP-WP-0004. The operator asked canned-prompts to build a database of versioned prompts recording where each came from and when — the first step toward a platform for collaborative prompting. The format had nowhere to put that. `provenance` records who wrote a prompt and where the idea came from; nothing recorded how a copy arrived in a particular store. Section 20.3 now specifies an `index.yaml` as store metadata rather than package data: how a copy arrived differs for every consumer, and recording an arrival must never rewrite the package that arrived. `add`, `install` and `publish` record registry, id, version, name, source, method, first-inclusion date, and the package's declared author, source and licence — the last three copied so a listing is readable without opening every package. A new `index` verb lists it. `included_at` is never overwritten; a re-run updates `last_seen_at`, because when a package first entered a collection is a fact about history rather than about the last command run. Tests 84 -> 90. Also records two findings from actually using the format: CANP-WP-0004-T03 — inclusion has no deduplication, so a diamond dependency renders shared content once per path. Found by composing a real collection. Not fixed here: deduplicating means choosing which occurrence survives and deciding what happens when two paths resolve different versions, which is resolver behaviour that section 10.4 deliberately avoids. Handed to CANP-WP-0005 with a leaning: document it, warn at validation time, do not deduplicate. The add_ons workaround in practice/pqrst-estimate is evidence about section 23's deferred "richer template syntax" — an optional appendix has to be an input with an empty default, because CPF has no conditionals. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Bjefh8NUiEiahN4JLwoSKM Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 388925@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: 3507023f-e0fd-4a1e-9d90-a0d4217d1502
1.6 KiB
1.6 KiB
| id | type | title | domain | repo | status | owner | topic_slug | created | updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CANP-WP-0005 | workplan | Document and detect inclusion diamonds | agents | canned-prompts | proposed | codex | practice | 2026-09-06 | 2026-09-06 |
Document and detect inclusion diamonds
Residual from CANP-WP-0004 (origin: residual, origin_ref: CANP-WP-0004).
Warn about repeated inclusion
id: CANP-WP-0005-T01
status: todo
priority: medium
CPF inclusion (§ 10.4) does not deduplicate: when one package reaches the same
dependency by two paths, the included text renders once per path. This was found
by building a real collection — helix/repo-advance rendered its conventions
block twice — and worked around downstream by factoring the shared routine into
its own fragment.
§ 10.4 says nothing about it, so an author meets the behaviour only by reading the output carefully. That silence is the defect.
Two questions, and the second depends on the first:
- Document it. State in § 10.4 that inclusion is textual and repeated, not deduplicated, and give the factoring pattern that avoids a diamond.
- Detect it. Decide whether validation should warn when a package reaches
the same dependency by more than one path. A warning is cheap and catches the
mistake at
addtime. Silently deduplicating is a different proposition entirely — it would mean choosing which occurrence survives, and deciding what happens when two paths resolve different versions of the same dependency. That is resolver behaviour, and § 10.4 keeps composition declarative on purpose.
Leaning: document it now, warn at validation time, and do not deduplicate.