77a2eadd28
correlation_id: 8a9408fd-c863-4b65-ad0a-d514f7d10c13 reason: Request own-voice layer declaration under §11 source: repo-manager Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 2564823@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: 2a7ed827-4928-4b9f-8613-9135c9cadfe9
65 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
65 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
# Intake records
|
|
|
|
## MASON-IN-0001 — Grandfather the legacy MASON-0001 identifier scheme
|
|
|
|
```yaml
|
|
id: MASON-IN-0001
|
|
kind: intake
|
|
title: Grandfather the legacy MASON-0001 identifier scheme
|
|
lane: green
|
|
status: closed
|
|
outcome: absorbed
|
|
origin: residual
|
|
origin_ref: MASON-WP-0002
|
|
priority: low
|
|
owner: ops-mason
|
|
description: The finished bootstrap workplan uses legacy MASON-0001 and noncanonical
|
|
MASON-0001-Txx identifiers, including a duplicate T01. Fleet canon says existing
|
|
identifiers are never renamed and legacy schemes must be grandfathered. Coordinate
|
|
with the Custodian canon steward and Repo Manager to add the exact legacy scheme
|
|
mapping, then verify statehub consistency without rewriting registered UUIDs or
|
|
historical source identity.
|
|
notes: Custodian decision 3c487545-ee40-4049-89fa-34b41747a7eb grandfathered
|
|
the exact MASON-0001 workplan and MASON-0001-TNN task schemes. Registered UUIDs
|
|
remain unchanged, and the duplicate MASON-0001-T01 source blocks are indexed as
|
|
one logical task while retaining both source locations as diagnostic provenance.
|
|
Absorbed by that decision and the CUST-WP-0063 canon/validator update.
|
|
created: '2026-08-22T09:33:08.629717Z'
|
|
updated: '2026-08-22T21:19:02Z'
|
|
state_hub_intake_id: "01a028d1-c4af-7a06-adb5-c90399721872"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## MASON-IN-0002 — Declaration requested: state this repository's layer in INTENT.md (security layer model §11)
|
|
|
|
```yaml
|
|
id: MASON-IN-0002
|
|
kind: intake
|
|
title: 'Declaration requested: state this repository''s layer in INTENT.md (security
|
|
layer model §11)'
|
|
status: open
|
|
origin: cross-repo
|
|
origin_ref: net-kingdom security-layer-model_v0.4 §11
|
|
priority: low
|
|
owner: ops-mason
|
|
requested_by: gate-house
|
|
proposed_layer: Staff
|
|
description: 'A conformance sweep on 2026-08-28 found this repository has no layer
|
|
declaration of its own. It carries a layering review note gate-house wrote into
|
|
the top of its INTENT.md on 2026-08-24, and that note names a layer — but the words
|
|
are gate-house''s, sitting above a line admitting the body is unadapted. Section
|
|
11 has since been amended to say so explicitly: a layer stated about a repository
|
|
by another repository is not a declaration; only the repository''s own file, in
|
|
its own voice, conforms. Seven of fifteen estate-authored repositories have declared;
|
|
this is one of the eight that have not. REQUESTED: state the layer in INTENT.md
|
|
in your own voice, or contest it. PROPOSED LAYER: Staff. Builds and tears down access
|
|
routes, credentials, and perimeters. Two things to state in your words: the Staff
|
|
binding rule (you act through Engine APIs, never directly against Tooling — a grep
|
|
of your own source is the check, as ops-warden did and found one), and the demarcation
|
|
you are half of: ops-mason and ops-warden own access lanes, access-engine owns access
|
|
rules. Contesting is a real option and costs nothing — the three repositories that
|
|
reviewed this model each returned a correction, two of which changed the standard.
|
|
If the proposed layer is wrong for what this repository actually does, that is more
|
|
useful to us than a label added to close a checkbox. Standard: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.4.md.'
|
|
created: '2026-08-28T21:03:29.920563Z'
|
|
updated: '2026-08-28T21:03:29.920563Z'
|
|
```
|