railiance-platform/workplans/RAILIANCE-WP-0016-architecture-cleanup-backlog.md

id	type	title	domain	repo	status	owner	topic_slug	created	updated	related_repos	state_hub_workstream_id
RAILIANCE-WP-0016	workplan	Architecture cleanup backlog, WSJF-prioritized	financials	railiance-platform	active	codex	railiance	2026-08-12	2026-08-12	railiance-master railiance-infra railiance-cluster railiance-enablement railiance-telemetry railiance-forge	8611b555-c681-496d-bfba-667198456837

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
9a	Telemetry: minimal metrics collection on railiance01	railiance-telemetry	8	5	5	4	4.5
9b	Telemetry: one expectation-based alert (needs 10b)	railiance-telemetry	8	5	2	2	7.5
10a	Run make verify; tighten the UFW assertion to check the allowlist	railiance-infra	8	7	9	1–2	12.0
10b	Schedule verification; route failures where they are seen	railiance-infra / Q7 owner	7	6	8	3	7.0
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 — Q2 and Q7, the two halves of the self-evidencing thread five layers independently asked for. They were rescoped on 2026-08-12 (see below) and item 10 turned out to be badly mis-sized: the conformance checker already exists in railiance-infra and has simply not run since 2026-03-09. Slice 10a is now the highest-value item after the ratifications at WSJF 12.0.

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.

Rescoping items 9 and 10 (2026-08-12)

What was assumed

That Q2 Observability and Q7 Governance were both greenfield builds of comparable size (5), sitting mid-table at WSJF 4.6.

What is actually there

railiance-infra already has:

• goss/baseline.yaml — a host baseline assertion suite
• ansible/roles/goss + ansible/playbooks/verify.yaml — the runner
• make verify — runs it against all hosts, commits TAP reports to git, and exits non-zero on failure
• reports/*.tap — an evidence trail, last written 2026-03-09

So a check-and-evidence mechanism exists and is wired. Two things are wrong with it, and neither is a build:

1. Nothing runs it. Five months of silence. A verification suite that is not scheduled is a verification suite that does not exist.
2. Its firewall assertion is too loose in exactly the place that mattered. It asserts /6443\/tcp.*ALLOW/ — that the port is allowed. It does not assert from whom. That regex passes identically whether 6443 is restricted to one operator address or open to the entire internet, which is precisely the drift that went undetected.

It would, however, have caught the other finding: it asserts Status: active, and UFW is entirely inactive on CoulombCore.

The rescoped slices

Item 10 — conformance loop

Slice	Work	Size
10a	Run make verify against both hosts; tighten the UFW assertion to compare the live allowlist against k3s_api_allowed_sources rather than matching any ALLOW; fix what it surfaces	2
10b	Schedule it, and route failures somewhere a human or agent actually sees	3
10c	Extend to declaration conformance — rapp/rail/reef schema validation	blocked on item 6
10d	Deployable coverage: every live deployable maps to exactly one rapp	blocked on item 8

Item 9 — telemetry

Slice	Work	Size
9a	Minimal metrics collection on railiance01	4
9b	One expectation-based alert on the 10b path	2
9c	Retention sufficient to prove a restore or rollout held	3
9d	Dashboards and agent-queryable surfaces	4

The shared dependency worth naming

10b and 9b are the same plumbing. Both are "a check failed — now make that visible to someone who can act." Building an alert path twice would be waste, and building either of 9 or 10 without it produces logs nobody reads. That path is the real first dependency for both, and it is small.

It also has an obvious candidate already in the fleet: the Goss suite commits TAP evidence to git, and State Hub takes progress events. Neither is an alert, but the gap between them is narrow.

Revised positions

Item	Old WSJF	New WSJF	Effect
10a run + tighten Goss	4.6 (as part of 10)	12.0 (V8 TC7 RR9 / size 2)	rises to 4th overall
10b schedule + alert path	—	7.0 (V7 TC6 RR8 / size 3)	rises above ArgoCD
9b one real alert	—	7.5 (V8 TC5 RR2 / size 2)	depends on 10b
9a metrics collection	4.6	4.5 (unchanged)	stays mid-table

Conclusion: item 10a should be done next, immediately after the ratifications. It is two points of effort, it directly closes the hole that produced this session's security finding, and it converts an existing but dormant asset into a working control. Item 9 is correctly mid-table and genuinely is a build.

The lesson worth keeping

The original size-5 estimate for item 10 was wrong because nobody looked. The gap analysis correctly identified "no conformance loop" as a capability gap, but the capability was two-thirds built and unrun. Before sizing a gap as a build, check whether it is actually an abandonment.

Tasks

id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T01
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "9fabf938-0479-4282-b1fe-88af0d2fbd36"

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.

id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T02
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "5b4d5f69-40fd-4af0-be23-325864cea48b"

Score and order the backlog by WSJF, recording owner and reasoning per item so the ordering can be argued with rather than merely followed.

id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T03
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "9ede2fe5-5b6c-4792-b141-9c8f140c1a28"

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.

id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T04
status: done
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "aac02de1-6367-4767-b7ee-c980577e778f"

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.

Done 2026-08-12, and the answer changes the order. See "Rescoping items 9 and 10" below. The headline: item 10 was mis-sized by a wide margin, because the conformance checker already exists — railiance-infra has a Goss baseline suite with a make verify target that runs it against all hosts and commits TAP reports to git. It has not run since 2026-03-09, five months. The work is not to build a loop; it is to run what exists, tighten two assertions, and schedule it.

id: RAILIANCE-WP-0016-T05
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "a40faaf1-77db-43f5-a774-6ab3866d8e1d"

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-T03 delivered; routed to railiance-master for adoption (message ac73b172). T04 rescoping and T05 S3-owned execution remain.