clay-borg/workplans/CB-WP-0048-a-configuration-not-a-variant.md

id	kind	title	status	state_hub_workstream_id
CB-WP-0048	product	A configuration, not a variant	active	44ceb8d8-e6e2-46d6-a694-fd275804b771

Purpose

structural tier  M   (changes the state and therefore the recording, and
                      replaces the selector every consumer names)
declared tier    M

Implements ADR-0022, adopting ground-game catalog schema 2 per CB-RES-0010.

The gap, stated exactly

scoped_plus_attack_soothe is a profile in the vendored catalog today. clay-borg cannot name it — not "has not implemented", cannot express. Variant has three arms; H1 bundles flat pressure with self-soothe and cannot be taken apart, H2 gives scoping alone, and their product has no arm. Every future combination has the same problem.

The kernel is not the obstacle: four sites branch on the variant and each belongs to exactly one aspect (ADR-0022 Context). The selector is the blob.

Task: the mirror is held by the gate

id: CB-WP-0048-T00
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "fe1a39f4-d123-4c83-be64-35901603edcd"

Done 2026-08-08. The schema-2 mirror (catalog.yaml, ASPECTS.md, CATALOG.md, modules/) arrived vendored with no recorded digests — 19 files — and make edition-check was red on the working tree.

• Digests are now generated by walking editions/, not typed. Two reviews (CB-REV-0002 #8, CB-REV-0003 #8) already found hand-written lists that made their own controls vacuous; a mirror that grows a directory is precisely the case a maintained list loses.
• editions/PROVENANCE-catalog.md was a file inside the mirrored tree that upstream does not have, which the gate correctly refused as unexplained. Folded into editions/ground-darvo-r0/PROVENANCE.md — provenance about the mirror is ours, so it does not live inside the thing it describes.

Noted, not fixed: vendored_files() matches only .csv inside the edition directory, so a non-CSV added there is invisible to both the digest and the freshness check. The sibling walk has no such hole. The exposure is one file today (PROVENANCE.md, ours) — but this is F26's shape again and should be closed on its own terms.

Task: Configuration and Rules

id: CB-WP-0048-T01
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "4b8bfc25-0e4d-4fdc-9dad-5cdb66798207"

Per ADR-0022 D1. Identity as data, behaviour exhaustive, resolve() between them.

Done 2026-08-08. catalog.rs reads schema 2 (aspects, modules, profiles) and refuses a schema it does not understand by name — a reader that silently accepted schema 1 would answer questions about aspects over a file that has none. config.rs holds Configuration (identity), Rules (behaviour) and resolve().

Nothing about the aspect list, the defaults, or which modules are proposed is written in our source; all of it is read. The tests locate the proposed module by searching the catalog for status: proposed, so if ground-game implements it upstream the test looks elsewhere rather than going stale.

mutation	what went red
the two errors become one sentence	"a module the catalog HAS was reported as unknown"
one-per-aspect check removed	"two modules on one aspect must be refused"
identity refuses what it cannot run	"selecting a catalog module must NAME a configuration"
legacy lookup stops reading the catalog	"h2 and profile h2 are not the same point in aspect space"

scoped_plus_attack_soothe now resolves — problem_stress.scoped × attack_relief.self_soothe_ge4, the combination the three-armed enum could not express.

Controls:

• a proposed module is refused BY NAME, distinguishably from a typo — the two-error requirement is the reason this shape was chosen, so it is the first test;
• two modules on one aspect are refused (GAME↔MODEL validation);
• an aspect the catalog has and the kernel does not know still parses, because a configuration must be nameable before it is runnable;
• Rules has no catch-all arm, so a new module cannot fall through silently (CB-WP-0034's exhaustiveness, which caught two commands before any test ran);
• mutation-proven, each control against its own defect.

Task: legacy ids alias forever

id: CB-WP-0048-T02
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "3232a451-b60a-42f6-8200-b8115d4b35b9"

Per ADR-0022 D2, through the catalog's own legacy_experiment_id.

Controls:

• all 26 recordings replay byte-identically, which is the whole constraint — make sim is the authority;
• --variant h2 and --profile h2 produce the same resolved configuration, asserted on the resolved object rather than on behaviour, so the equivalence is exact and not a coincidence of outcomes;
• the expansion comes from the catalog, not a table in our source: a second copy of ground-game's mapping is F25's shape.

Task: the resolved configuration is recorded

id: CB-WP-0048-T03
status: todo
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "5be13b74-bcc9-4697-96bb-91f1966c760b"

Per ADR-0022 D3 and CB-RES-0010 §5.3: cb-play sessions, replays, trial logs and panel cells carry the resolved module list.

Controls:

• the recorded configuration is the applied one, proven the way CB-WP-0046 proved the trial-log stamp — from the state, not the flag;
• the trial-log marker carries the configuration, closing the gap CB-WP-0047 left open (variant stamped, scenario and mode not);
• a bare field write cannot leave a module inert — the H2 defect had three call sites and this is the generalisation of it.

Task: the page and the panels speak aspects

id: CB-WP-0048-T04
status: todo
priority: normal
state_hub_task_id: "ff135f86-2265-4db5-b412-23fcb68df489"

Controls:

• the table names every live module, not a legacy id — the CB-WP-0044 family: a rules change the page cannot name is reported as "no changes";
• panels facet by aspect (CB-RES-0010 §5.4), so "hold all aspects fixed, vary one" is what the harness does rather than what a reader reconstructs;
• a module nothing measured is reported unmeasured, not absent.

Not done here

• No policy reads the configuration. F27 already records that the three scoring modes produce identical play because GreedyPolicy never consults state.mode; the same will be true of every aspect. Selection without aspect-aware policies gives configurations we can run and cannot evaluate — CB-RES-0010 §5.4's last bullet is F27 restated. This is the next pass, and it is a prerequisite for measuring any new module, not a nicety.
• end_condition and problem_deal get no kernel path here. Both their non-default modules are status: proposed; T01 makes them nameable and refusable, which is what ADR-0022 asks for and all it asks for.
• specs/Taxonomy.md does not yet distinguish aspect from stratum. ADR-0022 D0 states the distinction; the taxonomy is where it belongs, and without it the two vocabularies will be crossed in exactly the way the taxonomy exists to prevent.