coulomb/ops-warden
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases 2 Packages Wiki Activity Actions

docs: advance remaining owner gates
All checks were successful
CI Smoke / host-smoke (push) Successful in 0s
Details
CI Smoke / container-smoke (push) Successful in 1s
Details

Browse source 
Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-5.6-sol
Assistant-Session: 01a0290b-3241-74c3-b868-6049545af836
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-08-23 11:25:03 +02:00
parent bc1966da82
commit c8fa02adf0
2 changed files with 25 additions and 2 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

15
workplans/WARDEN-WP-0033-native-lane-handoff.md
View file

@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ planning_priority: P1
depends_on_workplans:
- WARDEN-WP-0030
created: "2026-08-21"
updated: "2026-08-22"
updated: "2026-08-23"
state_hub_workstream_id: "4627d89b-4b00-562a-81e9-76e96f90fa7e"
---
@ -199,6 +199,19 @@ avoid is the 2026-08-17 one recorded in `.claude/rules/finding-routing.md`:
ops-warden answered a question well and never routed it, and another repo ended
up filing it.
**Followed up 2026-08-23 after the immediate enforcement gap closed.**
`RAILIANCE-WP-0022` no longer waits for this ownership decision: the platform
owner deployed a dedicated coding-agent AppRole, proved deny-wins when it is
combined with workload read, and identified an exact-bound KeyCape JWT role as
the migration target. That makes the remaining question narrower and more
important rather than obsolete: who owns issuance of the durable
KeyCape/Keycloak-backed machine identity?
Direct follow-up `d25d4604-5713-42a8-8e3a-1ea31b5a5cc7` asks `key-cape` to
accept that target identity with an authoritative workplan/interface, or refuse
and name the actual owner. T04 remains `wait` until one of those two answers is
recorded; the live AppRole is operational evidence, not an ownership answer.
```task
id: WARDEN-WP-0033-T05
status: done