id: rmaster-itc-alignment-2026-08-18
title: Railiance Master InfoTechCanon Alignment Review
repository:
  slug: railiance-master
  path_or_url: https://forgejo.coulomb.social/coulomb/railiance-master
  branch: main
reviewer:
  name: codex
  reviewed_at: "2026-08-18"
  method: InfoTechCanon consumer alignment review kit at revision 1695d62bdcca118bd6ae208c166c1ac0de66f8e3
review_mode: full-alignment-review

repository_context:
  producer_intent:
    - Own the Railiance-specific framework architecture and repository-family vocabulary.
    - Keep ownership, execution contract, managed workload package, and substrate axes separate and composable.
    - Author and govern framework ADRs while delegating permanent publication downstream without writeback.
  current_scope:
    - Eight accepted framework ADRs and stakeholder-facing architecture contracts.
    - Rail, rapp, and reef declaration schemas plus cross-family validation tooling.
    - Cross-repo architecture workplans whose implementation is routed to concrete ownership repositories.
    - Reviewed architecture-demand intake and dated resolution history.
  consumer_purposes:
    - Give Railiance repositories one stable meaning for rail, rapp, reef, ownership, admission, and exposure.
    - Give maintainers an evidence-linked path from demand through decision to repo-local implementation.
    - Give policy-nexus authoritative source records that can be published without becoming a second source of truth.
    - Give humans and agents predictable orientation and retrieval surfaces.
  evidence_inventory:
    - source: INTENT.md
      role: Producer intent and stable architecture direction.
    - source: SCOPE.md
      role: Current responsibility, exclusions, conformance, and gap declaration.
    - source: demand/README.md
      role: Unreviewed DemandSignal intake and disposition contract.
    - source: history/260818-demand-canon-policy-alignment.md
      role: Worked demand-review evidence linking an operator request to RMASTER-WP-0024.
    - source: docs/adr/
      role: Accepted framework decisions and policy source records.
    - source: schemas/ and tools/validate-family-declarations.py
      role: Machine-readable declaration contracts and enforcement evidence.
    - source: workplans/ and WORK-RECORDS.md
      role: Repo-authoritative task state and State Hub projection.
    - source: workplans/archived/
      role: State Hub-compatible archive for completed workplans.
    - source: docs/evidence/
      role: Dated decision and verification evidence that does not become policy by location.

selected_canon_surfaces:
  - id: model/purpose-demand-extension
    reason_selected: The repo must distinguish producer intent, current scope, consumer purpose, raw demand, and scope pressure.
    required_evidence: [INTENT.md, SCOPE.md, demand/README.md, reviewed demand record]
  - id: pattern/intent-scope-purposes
    reason_selected: The prior orientation mixed aspiration and current implementation and had no explicit demand plane.
    required_evidence: [INTENT.md, SCOPE.md, demand/]
  - id: model/governance
    reason_selected: The repo authors accepted ADRs, evidence-backed decisions, exposure grants, and lifecycle metadata.
    required_evidence: [docs/adr/, docs/evidence/, workplan review gates]
  - id: model/task
    reason_selected: Architecture findings become repo-local workplans and indexed State Hub tasks.
    required_evidence: [workplans/, WORK-RECORDS.md, State Hub bindings]
  - id: model/information-space
    reason_selected: The repo separates current stakeholder documents, evidence, intake, and inactive history.
    required_evidence: [docs/, docs/evidence/, demand/, history/]
  - id: model/landscape
    reason_selected: Railiance architecture describes repositories, services, execution contracts, workloads, substrates, and their relations.
    required_evidence: [docs/repository-axes.md, docs/reef-substrate-model.md, family schemas]
  - id: standard/repository-layout
    reason_selected: The request explicitly asks for alignment with the canonical retrieval-oriented repository structure.
    required_evidence: [INTENT.md, SCOPE.md, demand/, workplans/, docs/, history/]

mapping_findings:
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M01
    source_concept: Repository intent
    canon_target: model/governance Intent and pattern/intent-scope-purposes
    fit: direct
    evidence: [INTENT.md]
    notes: Stable direction is separate from current implementation claims.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M02
    source_concept: Current repository scope
    canon_target: model/governance Scope and pattern/intent-scope-purposes
    fit: direct
    evidence: [SCOPE.md]
    notes: Current artifacts, authority, exclusions, and gaps are explicit.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M03
    source_concept: Architecture proposal intake
    canon_target: model/purpose-demand-extension DemandSignal, ConsumerPurpose, PurposeFit, and ScopePressure
    fit: direct
    evidence: [demand/README.md, history/260818-demand-canon-policy-alignment.md]
    notes: Raw demand is not a task; disposition is required before commitment.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M04
    source_concept: Framework architecture decisions
    canon_target: model/governance Decision, policy source, evidence, status, and review lifecycle
    fit: direct
    evidence: [docs/adr/, RMASTER-WP-0024-T02]
    notes: Content authority stays here while publication is read-only downstream.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M05
    source_concept: Cross-repo architecture workplans
    canon_target: model/task work item lifecycle and dependencies
    fit: direct
    evidence: [workplans/, WORK-RECORDS.md, AGENTS.md]
    notes: Files remain authoritative and State Hub remains an index/cache.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M06
    source_concept: Completed-work archive
    canon_target: standard/repository-layout history semantics and model/task lifecycle
    fit: partial
    evidence: [workplans/archived/, history/, SCOPE.md]
    notes: Semantics align, but Custodian ADR-001 requires workplans/archived rather than generic history placement for deterministic indexing.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M07
    source_concept: Rail, rapp, reef, and ownership repository axes
    canon_target: model/landscape systems, services, runtime resources, relationships, and boundaries
    fit: partial
    evidence: [docs/repository-axes.md, schemas/rail.schema.json, schemas/rapp.schema.json, schemas/reef.schema.json]
    notes: Native terms are intentionally preserved; flattening them into generic landscape terms would lose Railiance semantics.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M08
    source_concept: Stakeholder documentation and dated evidence
    canon_target: model/information-space knowledge packaging, provenance, and retrieval
    fit: direct
    evidence: [docs/, docs/evidence/, history/]
    notes: Policy sources, working evidence, and inactive exploration remain distinct.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M09
    source_concept: Permanent policy publication
    canon_target: model/governance authority and provenance boundary
    fit: direct
    evidence: [INTENT.md, SCOPE.md, RMASTER-WP-0024-T02]
    notes: policy-nexus owns addresses, rendering, history, and currency but cannot modify source decisions.
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-M10
    source_concept: Repository layout conformance
    canon_target: standard/repository-layout core conformance
    fit: direct
    evidence: [INTENT.md, SCOPE.md, demand/, workplans/, docs/]
    notes: Optional directories are omitted intentionally rather than created empty.

scorecard:
  - dimension: fit
    rating: 3
    rationale: Selected canon surfaces map cleanly; Railiance-native family terms remain intentionally specialized.
    evidence: [mapping findings RMASTER-ITC-M01 through RMASTER-ITC-M10]
  - dimension: gaps
    rating: 3
    rationale: Remaining gaps are explicit and bounded to downstream ADR publication plus periodic reassessment.
    evidence: [SCOPE.md Gap to Intent, RMASTER-WP-0024-T02]
  - dimension: conflicts
    rating: 3
    rationale: No unresolved semantic collision remains; the one archive-path tension is documented as a compatibility question rather than silently normalized.
    evidence: [RMASTER-ITC-M06, SCOPE.md repository-layout alignment]
  - dimension: evidence-quality
    rating: 3
    rationale: Claims link to source files, accepted ADRs, schemas, validation tools, workplan bindings, and dated review evidence.
    evidence: [repository_context.evidence_inventory]
  - dimension: implementation-priority
    rating: 3
    rationale: Publication, demand intake, archival cleanup, and repeatable review are ordered by current consumer value and ownership.
    evidence: [RMASTER-WP-0024]
  - dimension: canon-pressure
    rating: 2
    rationale: Consumer alignment is strong, but ITC-REPO-LAYOUT should clarify compatibility with task systems that require a specialized indexed archive path.
    evidence: [RMASTER-ITC-M06]
  - dimension: workplan-readiness
    rating: 4
    rationale: RMASTER-WP-0024 has explicit boundaries, owners, statuses, acceptance criteria, downstream routing, and validation paths.
    evidence: [workplans/RMASTER-WP-0024-canon-and-policy-publication-alignment.md]

decision_band: ready-to-adopt

recommended_workplans:
  - id: RMASTER-WP-0024
    title: Align railiance-master with InfoTechCanon and policy publication
    target_repo: railiance-master
    priority: high
    rationale: The existing workplan owns all actionable consumer-side gaps without moving implementation into the canon or publisher repos.
    tasks:
      - Complete downstream permanent ADR publication verification.
      - Maintain reviewed demand intake and disposition evidence.
      - Preserve State Hub-compatible completed-work archival.
      - Repeat this alignment review when intent, scope, or the selected canon surfaces materially change.

canon_feedback:
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-F01
    feedback_type: open-question
    summary: Clarify whether ITC-REPO-LAYOUT full conformance permits a repository-specific indexed archive such as workplans/archived when moving completed tasks to generic history would break the task system's deterministic discovery contract.
    proposed_owner: info-tech-canon
    handoff_message_id: 446f5cf1-53f7-4ca0-ab5a-f7278eae6fd7
  - id: RMASTER-ITC-F02
    feedback_type: no-change
    summary: Rail, rapp, reef, and ownership repository axes should remain Railiance-native specializations mapped to the Landscape Model; no generic canon concept change is requested.
    proposed_owner: railiance-master