docs(workplans): RMGR-WP-0004 repository standards conformance (proposed)

Repo Manager takes ownership of the standards repositories must comply with
— flavor, required files, naming, classification, conformance checking —
and of governed scaffolding, per prj-state-hub-retirement decision
747011c6.

Hubs are registers; they do not scaffold or rewrite repo files. Extends
ADR-001 from data to behaviour. Receives the implementation retargeted out
of STATE-WP-0080.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

workplans/RMGR-WP-0004-repository-standards-conformance.md

@@ -0,0 +1,203 @@
+---
+id: RMGR-WP-0004
+type: workplan
+title: "Repository standards conformance and governed scaffolding"
+domain: infotech
+repo: repo-manager
+status: proposed
+owner: codex
+topic_slug: infotech
+created: "2026-08-16"
+updated: "2026-08-16"
+parent_project: prj-state-hub-retirement
+parent_workplan: SHR-WP-0001
+related:
+  - STATE-WP-0080
+  - STATE-WP-0079
+  - RMGR-WP-0001
+  - CFED-WP-0001
+---
+
+# Repository standards conformance and governed scaffolding
+
+## Goal
+
+Establish Repo Manager as the owner of **the standards repositories must comply
+with** — flavor, required files, naming conventions, classification, and
+conformance checking — and of the governed scaffolding that creates conformant
+repositories.
+
+Hubs are registers. They index and project repository-owned records; they do not
+scaffold, template, or rewrite repository files. This workplan moves that
+capability to its correct owner.
+
+## Decision basis
+
+`prj-state-hub-retirement` decision `747011c6` (2026-08-16, Bernd Worsch):
+
+> Hubs are registers: they index and project repository-owned records. They do
+> not scaffold, template, or rewrite repository files. Repo Manager owns
+> repository representation and governed mutation, and therefore owns the
+> standards repositories must comply with.
+
+This extends **ADR-001** (hub is a read model) from *data* to *behaviour*. A hub
+that writes `INTENT.md`, `AGENTS.md`, `.custodian-brief.md`, and bootstrap
+workplans into repositories is already outside its own boundary — the register
+path is repo mutation wearing hub clothing.
+
+It is a placement correction rather than a scope expansion: `SCOPE.md` already
+claims "repository registration, identity, classification, and lifecycle" and
+"controlled repository mutation through explicit commands and policy checks".
+
+## Model repository standards explicitly
+
+```task
+id: RMGR-WP-0004-T01
+status: todo
+priority: high
+```
+
+Give Repo Manager a first-class representation of the standards a repository is
+expected to satisfy, rather than encoding them implicitly in a scaffolding
+script. At minimum:
+
+- **flavor** — product, tooling, research, business, experimental, project
+  (`prj-`), and how it is determined (`.repo-classification.yaml` `category`,
+  `GOAL.md` `repo_flavor`, slug prefix, in that precedence);
+- **required files** per flavor, with the purpose document differing by flavor
+  (`INTENT.md` for durable repos, `GOAL.md` for `prj-`);
+- **naming conventions** — repo slug, workplan prefix derivation;
+- **anti-patterns** that are violations rather than gaps (shipping both
+  `INTENT.md` and `GOAL.md`; a flavor-derived workplan prefix).
+
+Source standards: `project-repository-flavor_v0.1.md` and
+`repo-classification-standard_v1.0.md` in the Custodian canon. Canon stays
+authoritative; Repo Manager implements against it and must not fork the rules
+into a second definition.
+
+## Implement conformance checking
+
+```task
+id: RMGR-WP-0004-T02
+status: wait
+priority: high
+```
+
+Check a repository against its flavor's standard and report violations with
+enough detail to fix them. Distinguish **missing** (a required file absent) from
+**contradictory** (an anti-pattern present) — the second is the more valuable
+signal and the one that went undetected twice.
+
+Expose it as a command and as a contract other components can call, so the
+consistency lane and agent sessions get the same answer.
+
+Known first findings, both live today:
+
+- `prj-canon-federation` and `prj-state-hub-retirement` were each scaffolded with
+  a forbidden `INTENT.md` that had to be deleted by hand;
+- every `prj-` repo would collide on workplan prefix `PRJ-WP-`, because the
+  prefix is derived from the flavor marker rather than from the project.
+
+## Own governed scaffolding
+
+```task
+id: RMGR-WP-0004-T03
+status: wait
+priority: high
+```
+
+Take ownership of creating conformant repository files, replacing the templating
+currently embedded in `state-hub/statehub_register.py` (872 lines, with no
+reference to `.repo-classification.yaml`, `category`, or `repo_flavor`
+anywhere — the root cause of both failures).
+
+Requirements:
+
+- flavor-correct purpose document: `GOAL.md` for `prj-` repos with the four
+  sections the standard requires (Outcome, Invariants, Success gates, Project
+  retirement), `INTENT.md` for durable repos, never both;
+- workplan prefix derived from the project, not the flavor marker; prompt or
+  require explicit input rather than emitting a colliding default;
+- no generic bootstrap workplan for project repos, which compete with the
+  foundation workplan the project actually needs;
+- scaffolding is a **command** in the Repo Manager sense — requested action
+  distinct from confirmed repository state, with the resulting revision and a
+  normalized event recorded (`SCOPE.md` § API boundary).
+
+Behaviour for durable product repos must be preserved exactly; this workplan
+changes where the capability lives and how project repos are treated, not what
+ordinary repos receive.
+
+## Regenerate agent instructions per flavor
+
+```task
+id: RMGR-WP-0004-T04
+status: wait
+priority: medium
+```
+
+`make update-agent-instructions` regenerates `AGENTS.md`, `CLAUDE.md`,
+`.claude/rules/`, and `.custodian-brief.md` from templates that assume every
+repo has an `INTENT.md`. Bring regeneration under the same flavor model so
+running it on a `prj-` repo produces the standard's session order —
+`GOAL.md` → `SCOPE.md` → history → active workplans — rather than reintroducing
+`INTENT.md` references on every run.
+
+This matters beyond first registration: regeneration runs fleet-wide, so a
+flavor-blind template silently re-breaks conformant repos.
+
+## Accept the handoff from state-hub
+
+```task
+id: RMGR-WP-0004-T05
+status: wait
+priority: medium
+```
+
+Coordinate the transfer with `STATE-WP-0080`, which is retargeted to a thin
+guard plus handoff rather than a parallel implementation:
+
+- agree the cutover point at which `statehub register` delegates or refuses;
+- confirm the register path's disposition in
+  `prj-state-hub-retirement/inventory/` reads `move` to `repo-manager`, not
+  `keep`;
+- keep `SHR-WP-0001` as the coordination point; link by ID, do not duplicate its
+  task list.
+
+Follow the dual-run strangler pattern already proven in `RMGR-WP-0002` and
+`RMGR-WP-0003` rather than a flag-day switch.
+
+## Add compatibility and regression tests
+
+```task
+id: RMGR-WP-0004-T06
+status: wait
+priority: medium
+```
+
+Per `SCOPE.md` § Initial extraction source, extraction must preserve behaviour
+with compatibility tests. Cover:
+
+- a `prj-` repo scaffolds `GOAL.md`, no `INTENT.md`, no flavor-derived prefix;
+- a durable repo's scaffolded output is byte-identical to the state-hub path
+  (regression guard against changing ordinary-repo behaviour);
+- conformance checking flags both known live findings from T02;
+- flavor signals that disagree warn rather than silently resolving;
+- re-running scaffolding on a conformant repo is idempotent.
+
+## Confirm the canon boundary
+
+```task
+id: RMGR-WP-0004-T07
+status: wait
+priority: low
+```
+
+Repo Manager implements repository standards; it does not author them. Confirm
+with the Custodian that canon remains the authoritative source and record where
+the seam sits, so conformance rules do not drift into a second definition inside
+this repo.
+
+If the ownership shift warrants it, the Custodian may want an ADR recording that
+repository-standards enforcement is a Repo Manager responsibility — that is a
+Custodian decision, raised from here, not made here.