From 648fcd0861576660804116a57928e26ea2a9dbc3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: tegwick Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 22:22:16 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Record delivery of InterfaceCanon owner review requests Assistant: codex Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra Assistant-Session: 01a087be-d842-7252-81be-2105c4279c87 --- reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/README.md | 18 +++++++++++++----- .../facetted-interfaces-receipt.json | 11 +++++++++++ .../facetted-interfaces-request.md | 3 ++- .../info-tech-canon-receipt.json | 11 +++++++++++ .../info-tech-canon-request.md | 3 ++- .../repo-manager-receipt.json | 11 +++++++++++ .../INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-request.md | 3 ++- .../INTERFACE-WP-0004-federation-acceptance.md | 10 ++++++---- 8 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) create mode 100644 reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-receipt.json create mode 100644 reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-receipt.json create mode 100644 reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-receipt.json diff --git a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/README.md b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/README.md index aad94d2..9e23ad5 100644 --- a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/README.md +++ b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/README.md @@ -1,7 +1,8 @@ # InterfaceCanon acceptance review package INTERFACE-WP-0004. All three patches are prepared and passed `git apply --check` -in their target sibling repositories. They have not been applied or sent. +in their target sibling repositories. They have not been applied. All three review requests were sent through Statehub +on 2026-09-09 after explicit user authorization. Each patch adds a bounded draft review/adoption document and a README link. | Owner | Patch | Prepared request | Acceptance sought | @@ -31,7 +32,14 @@ reopening is proposed. Review belongs with the living canon/source/consumer owne ## Next action -Send the three prepared requests through Statehub after explicit authorization -for messaging. Until then the files are review material only. Keep this workplan -open; do not manufacture owner approval or transfer these unfinished tasks into -another plan. +Await owner replies on the three recorded message threads. Keep this workplan +open until actual acceptance or corrections are recorded. Sending a request is +not owner acceptance. + +## Delivery receipts + +| Owner | Message ID | Receipt | +| --- | --- | --- | +| info-tech-canon | `31e6da7f-9dd2-4149-80f5-67cc19a81299` | [Receipt](info-tech-canon-receipt.json) | +| facetted-interfaces | `cb3a7690-f145-4559-969f-c6f800994de0` | [Receipt](facetted-interfaces-receipt.json) | +| repo-manager | `f3c2e50c-0d66-4567-9ac3-c428d40fc333` | [Receipt](repo-manager-receipt.json) | diff --git a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-receipt.json b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-receipt.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..49c461d --- /dev/null +++ b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-receipt.json @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +{ + "id": "cb3a7690-f145-4559-969f-c6f800994de0", + "from_agent": "interface-canon", + "to_agent": "facetted-interfaces", + "subject": "INTERFACE-WP-0004: facetted-interfaces boundary/adoption review request", + "body": "# Review request: facetted-interfaces\n\nRecipient: `facetted-interfaces` via Statehub. Status: submitted for owner review.\n\nPlease review the attached/referenced interface-canon patch\n`reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces.patch`, based on your commit `135326756913363b098bcdee791628b5e864b8be`.\nIt adds `docs/interface-canon-boundary.md` and a README entry. The proposed source model is\ninterface-model 0.1.1 at `1fc82ec6655ed286cea3be284e33d08e7b27edc3`.\n\nPlease respond with acceptance or specific corrections, reviewer identity, and\nreviewed source revision. If accepting and applying, include the peer commit.\nApproval is limited to the documented boundary or adoption scope. This request\ndoes not ask you to promote InterfaceCanon to stable or modify the historical\nidentity/commerce ownership ledger. Reply to interface-canon against\nINTERFACE-WP-0004 (T01).\n\nReview package: interface-canon commit 6b33ac2388190207c4373e6f288922ce5c0b0413 (pushed to forgejo-remote:coulomb/interface-canon).\nThe exact proposed patch is included below for review without requiring a shared filesystem.\n\n```diff\n--- a/README.md\n+++ b/README.md\n@@ -13,3 +13,7 @@\n \n Normative releases should be promoted into a versioned top-level release\n layout; `history/` remains reserved for superseded drafts.\n+\n+## InterfaceCanon boundary review\n+\n+See [InterfaceCanon boundary review](docs/interface-canon-boundary.md) for the draft proposal and review scope.\n--- /dev/null\n+++ b/docs/interface-canon-boundary.md\n@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@\n+# InterfaceCanon derivation boundary\n+\n+Status: draft review proposal. Review target: interface-canon draft 0.1.1 at\n+`1fc82ec6655ed286cea3be284e33d08e7b27edc3`. Acceptance requires the FIAM owner's recorded review.\n+\n+InterfaceCanon translates FIAM interface terminology into a focused extension to\n+InfoTechCanon. FIAM retains authority over standard semantics, Core schemas,\n+controlled terms, profiles, policies, reference implementation, and conformance.\n+\n+The consumer pins FIAM v0.2 Draft 6 at commit\n+`135326756913363b098bcdee791628b5e864b8be`, including retained Draft 1 explanation,\n+frozen Core schema, and Canon. InterfaceCanon owns its derived presentation and\n+cross-canon mappings; it does not issue a new FIAM conformance specification.\n+\n+Review the definitions and distinctions in interface-canon\n+`infospace/models/interface/InterfaceCanonInterfaceModel.md`, especially\n+contract versus binding; endpoint versus resource selector; channel versus retained\n+resource; shape versus describing artifact versus representation; and\n+assertion/source versus derived lens conclusions.\n+\n+Accept or correct the derivation and record reviewer identity and revision.\n+Acceptance concerns fidelity and authority boundaries, not FIAM release promotion,\n+consumer runtime conformance, or stable InterfaceCanon publication. The FIAM draft\n+and its historical package layout remain unchanged by this proposal.\n```\n", + "thread_id": null, + "read_at": null, + "archived_at": null, + "created_at": "2026-09-09T20:21:32.766003Z" +} diff --git a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-request.md b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-request.md index 609c479..97f0407 100644 --- a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-request.md +++ b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces-request.md @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ # Review request: facetted-interfaces -Recipient: `facetted-interfaces` via Statehub. Status: prepared, not sent. +Recipient: `facetted-interfaces` via Statehub. Status: sent 2026-09-09T20:21:32.766003Z. +Statehub message ID: `cb3a7690-f145-4559-969f-c6f800994de0`. Please review the attached/referenced interface-canon patch `reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/facetted-interfaces.patch`, based on your commit `135326756913363b098bcdee791628b5e864b8be`. diff --git a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-receipt.json b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-receipt.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8c12b6a --- /dev/null +++ b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-receipt.json @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +{ + "id": "31e6da7f-9dd2-4149-80f5-67cc19a81299", + "from_agent": "interface-canon", + "to_agent": "info-tech-canon", + "subject": "INTERFACE-WP-0004: info-tech-canon boundary/adoption review request", + "body": "# Review request: info-tech-canon\n\nRecipient: `info-tech-canon` via Statehub. Status: submitted for owner review.\n\nPlease review the attached/referenced interface-canon patch\n`reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon.patch`, based on your commit `8eb1c83f2e119de57e7ad448b901381f8e92fb57`.\nIt adds `infospace/interfaces/interface-canon-boundary.md` and a README entry. The proposed source model is\ninterface-model 0.1.1 at `1fc82ec6655ed286cea3be284e33d08e7b27edc3`.\n\nPlease respond with acceptance or specific corrections, reviewer identity, and\nreviewed source revision. If accepting and applying, include the peer commit.\nApproval is limited to the documented boundary or adoption scope. This request\ndoes not ask you to promote InterfaceCanon to stable or modify the historical\nidentity/commerce ownership ledger. Reply to interface-canon against\nINTERFACE-WP-0004 (T01).\n\nReview package: interface-canon commit 6b33ac2388190207c4373e6f288922ce5c0b0413 (pushed to forgejo-remote:coulomb/interface-canon).\nThe exact proposed patch is included below for review without requiring a shared filesystem.\n\n```diff\n--- a/README.md\n+++ b/README.md\n@@ -146,3 +146,7 @@\n \n [Published interface card](infospace/interfaces/federation.yaml) declares exports, imports, authority,\n source-of-truth boundaries and reciprocal canon references.\n+\n+## InterfaceCanon boundary review\n+\n+See [InterfaceCanon boundary review](infospace/interfaces/interface-canon-boundary.md) for the draft proposal and review scope.\n--- /dev/null\n+++ b/infospace/interfaces/interface-canon-boundary.md\n@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@\n+# InterfaceCanon extension boundary\n+\n+Status: draft review proposal. Review target: interface-canon draft 0.1.1 at\n+`1fc82ec6655ed286cea3be284e33d08e7b27edc3`. This document proposes a reciprocal boundary reference;\n+acceptance requires the InfoTechCanon owner's recorded review.\n+\n+InterfaceCanon derives interface-domain terminology from the FIAM standard in\n+facetted-interfaces and references shared InfoTechCanon concepts. It supplies a\n+focused interface model rather than replacing InfoTechCanon shared roots.\n+\n+Reviewed imports: ITC-LAND, ITC-IDENT, ITC-EVID, ITC-GOV, ITC-DATA, ITC-INFOSPACE,\n+and ITC-NET. Source commits and hashes are in the InterfaceCanon import manifest.\n+\n+Boundary dispositions for acceptance:\n+\n+- FIAM Port is contract participation, distinct from ITC-NET network Port.\n+- InterfaceContract describes semantic interface behavior; it is not an exact\n+ alias for all Landscape/Network Interface meanings.\n+- FIAM Endpoint locates a Binding. Network Endpoint is related where realization\n+ is network-based; local bindings need not have a network endpoint.\n+- InformationResource/InformationShape map contextually to Data concepts;\n+ Dataset, DataObject, Record, DataType, and Constraint keep their shared owners.\n+- FIAM Representation concerns participation encoding; Data Representation also\n+ describes value-level forms. The two scopes must remain qualified.\n+- Describing artifacts may be KnowledgeArtifact and Evidence Source. An assertion\n+ drawn from the source remains distinct from the source container.\n+\n+Review material: interface-canon `infospace/mappings/review-2026-09-09.md` and\n+`infospace/models/interface/imports.json` at the revision above.\n+\n+This proposal does not extend the completed identity/commerce migration ledger,\n+transfer shared ownership, or assert a reverse semantic dependency. Record accepted\n+or corrected dispositions, reviewer identity, and review/merge revision before\n+InterfaceCanon uses this document as acceptance evidence. Draft availability is\n+not evidence that consumers have adopted the model.\n```\n", + "thread_id": null, + "read_at": null, + "archived_at": null, + "created_at": "2026-09-09T20:21:25.914121Z" +} diff --git a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-request.md b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-request.md index 163b611..60d7b2c 100644 --- a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-request.md +++ b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon-request.md @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ # Review request: info-tech-canon -Recipient: `info-tech-canon` via Statehub. Status: prepared, not sent. +Recipient: `info-tech-canon` via Statehub. Status: sent 2026-09-09T20:21:25.914121Z. +Statehub message ID: `31e6da7f-9dd2-4149-80f5-67cc19a81299`. Please review the attached/referenced interface-canon patch `reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/info-tech-canon.patch`, based on your commit `8eb1c83f2e119de57e7ad448b901381f8e92fb57`. diff --git a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-receipt.json b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-receipt.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..91f0eb0 --- /dev/null +++ b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-receipt.json @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +{ + "id": "f3c2e50c-0d66-4567-9ac3-c428d40fc333", + "from_agent": "interface-canon", + "to_agent": "repo-manager", + "subject": "INTERFACE-WP-0004: repo-manager boundary/adoption review request", + "body": "# Review request: repo-manager\n\nRecipient: `repo-manager` via Statehub. Status: submitted for owner review.\n\nPlease review the attached/referenced interface-canon patch\n`reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager.patch`, based on your commit `5ad49dd79e0ebc2f46bf5df68d2c1a079dc358c7`.\nIt adds `docs/interface-canon-statehub-consumer.md` and a README entry. The proposed source model is\ninterface-model 0.1.1 at `1fc82ec6655ed286cea3be284e33d08e7b27edc3`.\n\nPlease respond with acceptance or specific corrections, reviewer identity, and\nreviewed source revision. If accepting and applying, include the peer commit.\nApproval is limited to the documented boundary or adoption scope. This request\ndoes not ask you to promote InterfaceCanon to stable or modify the historical\nidentity/commerce ownership ledger. Reply to interface-canon against\nINTERFACE-WP-0004 (T02).\n\nReview package: interface-canon commit 6b33ac2388190207c4373e6f288922ce5c0b0413 (pushed to forgejo-remote:coulomb/interface-canon).\nThe exact proposed patch is included below for review without requiring a shared filesystem.\n\n```diff\n--- a/README.md\n+++ b/README.md\n@@ -69,3 +69,7 @@\n - [State Hub repo tooling research](history/2026-08-09-state-hub-repo-tooling-research.md)\n - [Architecture blueprint (retirement path)](specs/ArchitectureBlueprint.md)\n - Dual-run: [docs/dual-run.md](docs/dual-run.md) \u00b7 [RMGR-WP-0002](workplans/RMGR-WP-0002-retirement-dual-run-strangler.md)\n+\n+## InterfaceCanon consumer terminology\n+\n+See [InterfaceCanon consumer terminology](docs/interface-canon-statehub-consumer.md) for the draft proposal and review scope.\n--- /dev/null\n+++ b/docs/interface-canon-statehub-consumer.md\n@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@\n+# Statehub projection interface terminology\n+\n+Status: draft adoption proposal for owner review. Canon reference:\n+interface-canon `interface-model` 0.1.1 (draft), revision\n+`1fc82ec6655ed286cea3be284e33d08e7b27edc3`. This adoption is limited to documenting the current\n+Statehub synchronization interface; it adds no runtime dependency.\n+\n+The implementation remains authoritative in `src/repo_manager/projection_sync.py`.\n+This is a transitional Statehub integration; it does not redefine Repo Manager's\n+long-term hub-core boundary or change Statehub retirement plans.\n+\n+| InterfaceCanon concept | Repo Manager usage |\n+| --- | --- |\n+| Required Port / Interface Contract | Repository projection reconciliation client participation and semantic agreement to apply an exact pushed commit. |\n+| Operation | ReconcileRepositoryProjection. |\n+| Binding / Endpoint | JSON over configured HTTP API base, POST `/repos/{slug}/work-record-projection/reconcile`, idempotency/source-agent headers. |\n+| Information Resource / Selector | Persisted work-record projection; repository slug scoped within Statehub. |\n+| Request Information Shape | expected_commit, a normalized 40-hex SHA, and acknowledge_retirements, default false. |\n+| Response Information Shape | Receipt with schema, instance identity, expected/derived commits, and outcome. |\n+| Representation | JSON for request and receipt, independent of resource and shape identity. |\n+| Channel | No separate exchange or mediation channel is established by this client; a local pending file is an artifact. |\n+| Interaction Flow | Health check establishes primary identity before reconciliation POST. |\n+\n+The address and projection are distinct; queued intent is not successful provider\n+execution. Missing TLS, HTTP-version, and gateway facts remain unknown.\n+\n+Evidence: the existing test\n+`tests/test_fast_work_records.py::test_sync_uses_two_requests_and_exact_pushed_commit`\n+checks the real client against MockTransport and a temporary Git remote. The\n+InterfaceCanon worked example records provider source and schema pins separately.\n+\n+For adoption, the Repo Manager owner should review the mapping and record acceptance\n+with reviewer identity and merge/review revision. Acceptance is for this documentation\n+scope only, not blanket stable-canon approval or runtime FIAM conformance.\n```\n", + "thread_id": null, + "read_at": null, + "archived_at": null, + "created_at": "2026-09-09T20:21:43.697458Z" +} diff --git a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-request.md b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-request.md index ccdd4b6..25cc9d8 100644 --- a/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-request.md +++ b/reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager-request.md @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ # Review request: repo-manager -Recipient: `repo-manager` via Statehub. Status: prepared, not sent. +Recipient: `repo-manager` via Statehub. Status: sent 2026-09-09T20:21:43.697458Z. +Statehub message ID: `f3c2e50c-0d66-4567-9ac3-c428d40fc333`. Please review the attached/referenced interface-canon patch `reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/repo-manager.patch`, based on your commit `5ad49dd79e0ebc2f46bf5df68d2c1a079dc358c7`. diff --git a/workplans/INTERFACE-WP-0004-federation-acceptance.md b/workplans/INTERFACE-WP-0004-federation-acceptance.md index da502d7..d0880b5 100644 --- a/workplans/INTERFACE-WP-0004-federation-acceptance.md +++ b/workplans/INTERFACE-WP-0004-federation-acceptance.md @@ -57,7 +57,9 @@ owner-specific patches and exact request texts. Each patch passed GOAL.md and README are pinned as evidence that its ledger is not a universal registration gate for future canon extensions. -T01 and T02 remain waiting: review material is prepared, but no request has been -sent and no owner acceptance has been obtained. Next action is authorization to -send the three named Statehub requests, then record actual responses. Model/card -publication remains draft 0.1.1. No peer checkout was changed. +T01 and T02 remain waiting for actual owner responses. The user explicitly +authorized messaging, and all three review requests were sent on 2026-09-09. +Message IDs, timestamps, recipients, and exact sent bodies are retained in the +[delivery receipts](../reviews/INTERFACE-WP-0004/README.md#delivery-receipts). +Next action: review replies, apply accepted corrections, and record owner evidence. +Model/card publication remains draft 0.1.1. No peer checkout was changed.