coulomb/state-hub
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

docs(STATE-WP-0079): retirement freeze policy, close T01
All checks were successful
CI Smoke / host-smoke (push) Successful in 0s
Details
CI Smoke / container-smoke (push) Successful in 1s
Details

Browse source 
States the four admissible reasons for a change to state-hub during
retirement -- preserve compatibility, enable extraction, reduce scope, fix
operational risk -- and the inadmissible case: establishing new permanent
ownership in the component being retired.

The operative test is 'where does this live after cutover?', not 'is this a
good change?' Most inadmissible changes are good changes; STATE-WP-0080's
retarget to RMGR-WP-0004 is the worked example.

Enforced by review rather than new automation: a freeze-checker built inside
State Hub would itself be new permanent automation here, so the policy would
violate itself. New tables/routes/MCP tools are the one hard stop.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-08-20 07:20:56 +02:00
parent 93e95f93e7
commit 64b71320e7
3 changed files with 104 additions and 3 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

17
workplans/STATE-WP-0079-retirement-strangler.md
View file

@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ Expand pilot list here as cutover progresses; do not add new checkout mutators i
```task
id: STATE-WP-0079-T01
status: todo
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "375c0b66-98b0-4d5b-98dd-4ad2883a4051"
```
@ -51,6 +51,19 @@ Document and enforce: changes during retirement must preserve compatibility,
enable extraction, reduce scope, or fix operational risk — not establish new
permanent ownership (INTENT retirement status).
**Result (2026-08-20):** `policies/retirement-freeze.md`, following the existing
`policies/` convention. States the four admissible reasons, the inadmissible
case (new permanent ownership here), and the operative test — *where does this
live after cutover?* — since most inadmissible changes are otherwise good
changes. Uses `STATE-WP-0080`'s retarget as the worked example.
**Enforced by review, not by new automation.** A freeze-checker built inside
State Hub would be new permanent automation in the component being retired, so
the policy would violate itself. Gates attach to points where changes are
already reviewed: new workplan goal statements, non-trivial task starts, and
slice execution. New tables, routes, or MCP tools carry a presumption against
and are the one hard stop.
## Capability strangler plan
```task
@ -169,7 +182,7 @@ evidence, stop service, archive repo read-only. Residuals → live owners.
## Acceptance
- [ ] Freeze policy documented
- [x] Freeze policy documented
- [x] Strangler plan covers all inventory capabilities
- [x] prj-/GOAL.md register path works
- [ ] Move/replace slices evidenced with tests/counts