Gap analysis and WSJF-prioritized cleanup backlog
Compares INTENT (declared aspiration) against SCOPE (declared state) against verified reality for every railiance-* repo. This was only possible now: a gap could not be distinguished from a stale document until the architecture was coherently defined, the SCOPE files described verified rather than assumed reality, and the INTENT files stated current rather than copied intent. Names the pattern that organizes the work: every gap is declared-but-unbuilt (telemetry, S4, conformance loop), built-but-undeclared (the firewall restriction, Q1 custody, the Plane dimension), or decided-but-unmoved (forge placement, hosts retirement, rapp schema). The third kind is cheapest to clear and blocks the most; the second is most dangerous, because it stays invisible until something breaks - the firewall case was found by accident. RAILIANCE-WP-0016 orders 19 items by WSJF with owner and reasoning per item. Top three are nearly free and all decided-but-unmoved. Item 1, converging the firewall allowlist, is a live exposure: two standing grants point at addresses the ISP has reassigned. Item 2, five pending ratifications in railiance-master, blocks a quarter of the backlog for a day of decisions. Flags honestly that the size scores for telemetry and the conformance loop are guesses, that item 13 is blocked rather than deprioritized, and that this backlog belongs to railiance-master rather than S3 - it lives here only because the analysis was done here. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
codex
parent
28f445fa89
commit
e61de17b0d
2 changed files with 316 additions and 0 deletions
160
workplans/RAILIANCE-WP-0016-architecture-cleanup-backlog.md
Normal file
160
workplans/RAILIANCE-WP-0016-architecture-cleanup-backlog.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,160 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016
|
||||
type: workplan
|
||||
title: "Architecture cleanup backlog, WSJF-prioritized"
|
||||
domain: financials
|
||||
repo: railiance-platform
|
||||
status: active
|
||||
owner: codex
|
||||
topic_slug: railiance
|
||||
created: "2026-08-12"
|
||||
updated: "2026-08-12"
|
||||
related_repos:
|
||||
- railiance-master
|
||||
- railiance-infra
|
||||
- railiance-cluster
|
||||
- railiance-enablement
|
||||
- railiance-telemetry
|
||||
- railiance-forge
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# RAILIANCE-WP-0016 - Architecture cleanup backlog, WSJF-prioritized
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal
|
||||
|
||||
Turn the INTENT/SCOPE gap analysis into an ordered backlog, so cleanup happens
|
||||
highest-value-least-effort first rather than in the order things were noticed.
|
||||
|
||||
Source: `history/2026-08-12-intent-scope-gap-analysis.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Boundary — read before working this
|
||||
|
||||
This workplan **coordinates and orders**; it does not execute. Every item below
|
||||
belongs to another repo, and each carries its owning repo in the table. S3 does
|
||||
not own fleet architecture cleanup — `railiance-master` does.
|
||||
|
||||
This backlog lives here because the analysis was done here. **It should be
|
||||
adopted by `railiance-master`**, and this workplan closed, once master has a
|
||||
place for it. Until then it is better recorded than lost. S3 executes only the
|
||||
items marked `railiance-platform`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scoring method
|
||||
|
||||
WSJF = **Cost of Delay ÷ Job Size**, where Cost of Delay = Value + Time
|
||||
Criticality + Risk Reduction. Each component 1–10, job size 1–10.
|
||||
|
||||
Two honesty notes. These are **judgments, not measurements** — their value is
|
||||
the relative ordering and the explicit reasoning, not the arithmetic. And job
|
||||
sizes for unbuilt things (telemetry, the conformance loop) are the least
|
||||
reliable numbers here, because nobody has scoped them yet.
|
||||
|
||||
## The backlog
|
||||
|
||||
| # | Item | Owner | V | TC | RR | Size | **WSJF** |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| 1 | Converge the firewall allowlist; prune two stale grants | `railiance-infra` | 6 | 9 | 10 | 1 | **25.0** |
|
||||
| 2 | Ratify the five pending decisions | `railiance-master` | 8 | 7 | 5 | 1 | **20.0** |
|
||||
| 3 | Move the S1 goal off `railiance-hosts`, then retire it | `railiance-master` | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | **14.0** |
|
||||
| 4 | Settle ArgoCD: adopt, retire, or relocate | `railiance-master` | 6 | 6 | 6 | 2 | **9.0** |
|
||||
| 5 | Audit base role for further declared-vs-live drift | `railiance-infra` | 5 | 6 | 9 | 3 | **6.7** |
|
||||
| 6 | `rapp.yaml` schema + family declaration validator | `railiance-master` | 8 | 5 | 7 | 3 | **6.7** |
|
||||
| 7 | Reconcile hub capability attribution (C1) | `railiance-master` | 5 | 4 | 6 | 3 | **5.0** |
|
||||
| 8 | Deployable coverage check: every deployable → one rapp | `railiance-master` | 7 | 4 | 7 | 4 | **4.5** |
|
||||
| 9 | Telemetry MVP: metrics + alerting for one real expectation | `railiance-telemetry` | 9 | 6 | 8 | 5 | **4.6** |
|
||||
| 10 | Conformance loop MVP: declared-vs-live firewall check | `railiance-telemetry` / Q7 owner | 8 | 6 | 9 | 5 | **4.6** |
|
||||
| 11 | Consolidate the bootstrap path; sort inherited S2 content | `railiance-bootstrap` | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | **3.0** |
|
||||
| 12 | Forge migration: `rapp-forgejo` + S4 layer transfer | `railiance-forge` / S4 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 5 | **2.8** |
|
||||
| 13 | Prove a restore end to end | `railiance-platform` | 9 | 5 | 9 | 8 | **2.9** |
|
||||
| 14 | Valkey extraction + legacy postgresql-ha retirement | `railiance-platform` | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 | **2.6** |
|
||||
| 15 | Sweep remaining Gitea prose (~31 files each) | `railiance-forge`, `railiance-apps` | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | **2.3** |
|
||||
| 16 | Declare the Q6 cost boundary with `resource-control`/`fin-hub` | `railiance-master` | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | **2.5** |
|
||||
| 17 | Version S3 consumer service interfaces | `railiance-platform` | 6 | 3 | 5 | 6 | **2.3** |
|
||||
| 18 | Resolve the C4 ecosystem-modelling overlap | `railiance-master` / `railiance-fabric` | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | **2.2** |
|
||||
| 19 | S4 build-out: pipeline templates, SDKs, portal | `railiance-enablement` | 7 | 3 | 4 | 9 | **1.6** |
|
||||
|
||||
## Reading the order
|
||||
|
||||
**Items 1–3 are nearly free and should happen first.** All three are "decided
|
||||
but unmoved" — waiting on ratification or a single command, not on effort.
|
||||
Item 1 in particular is a live security exposure: two standing firewall grants
|
||||
point at addresses the ISP has since reassigned, and the fix is one convergence
|
||||
run.
|
||||
|
||||
**Item 2 is the highest-leverage thing on the list.** Five pending
|
||||
ratifications in `railiance-master` block items 6, 7, 8, 12 and parts of 9 and
|
||||
10. It is a day of decisions that unblocks a quarter of the backlog.
|
||||
|
||||
**Items 9 and 10 are the strategic core** despite mid-table WSJF. They are Q2
|
||||
and Q7 — the two halves of the self-evidencing thread that five layers
|
||||
independently asked for. Their size scores are guesses. Scoping them into
|
||||
smaller slices would likely move both up sharply, and **that rescoping is itself
|
||||
worth doing before committing to the order below them.**
|
||||
|
||||
**Item 13 is blocked, not deprioritized.** Proving a restore needs the object
|
||||
storage decision (`9c21c0e0`), which is escalated and awaiting human approval on
|
||||
commercial terms. Its WSJF understates it; treat the blocker as the real item.
|
||||
|
||||
**Item 19 is last and that is deliberate.** S4 build-out is the widest gap in
|
||||
the family, but it is large, and item 12 gives S4 a smaller first
|
||||
responsibility to prove delivery on. Building the portal before the forge
|
||||
transfer would be starting at the hard end.
|
||||
|
||||
## Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T01
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Produce the INTENT/SCOPE gap analysis across all `railiance-*` repos, comparing
|
||||
declared aspiration against declared state against verified reality.
|
||||
|
||||
Delivered: `history/2026-08-12-intent-scope-gap-analysis.md`. Named the pattern
|
||||
that organizes the backlog — every gap is *declared but unbuilt*, *built but
|
||||
undeclared*, or *decided but unmoved*, and the third kind is cheapest to clear
|
||||
while blocking the most.
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T02
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Score and order the backlog by WSJF, recording owner and reasoning per item so
|
||||
the ordering can be argued with rather than merely followed.
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T03
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Route the backlog to `railiance-master` for adoption, with the recommendation
|
||||
that it takes items 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 16 and 18 — the ratification and taxonomy
|
||||
items — and that this workplan closes once adopted.
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T04
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Rescope items 9 and 10 (telemetry MVP, conformance loop MVP) into deliverable
|
||||
slices before committing to their position. Their size scores are the least
|
||||
reliable on the list, and both are strategically central. A first slice of item
|
||||
10 could be as small as a Goss check comparing declared UFW state to live state
|
||||
on one host.
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T05
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Execute the S3-owned items in WSJF order — 13 (blocked on `9c21c0e0`), 14, 17 —
|
||||
and keep this table current as items complete or their sizes become known.
|
||||
|
||||
## Outcome
|
||||
|
||||
Pending. T01 and T02 delivered; the backlog is ordered and awaiting adoption.
|
||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue