Advance WP-0007: degeneration research, profile catalog, canonicalization checklist
T01: specs/TargetDegenerationPolicyResearch.md. Survey finds no precedent (BSL/FSL/Elastic) implements progress-sensitive degeneration - TRSL's model is original design. Proposes a candidate v1 formula (90-day rolling "quiet period" pause on Remission Credit accrual during active Development Credit periods), resolves the contributor-diversity input as explicitly not-adopted (no gaming-resistant signal exists yet), and resolves the longstop/progress-sensitivity relationship as a hard, unconditional backstop. Does not recommend v0 vs v1 for T02 - that's the human gate. T02: recommendation added (confirm v0 for the first pilot cohort, name v1 as the next iteration) - left todo per the human-accept policy. T03: specs/CanonicalMonetizationProfiles.md with worked narratives for all six catalog profiles, plus two new fixtures (product-ideation, general-consulting), both schema-validated and added to the parametrized conformance test. T04: specs/CanonicalizationReviewChecklist.md, an 8-item checklist layered on the already-implemented promote_extension_canonical() mechanism (WP-0006-T03) - defines what a reviewer must verify, not a new promotion mechanism.
This commit is contained in:
parent
8894acc584
commit
58a4dd1db2
8 changed files with 658 additions and 4 deletions
|
|
@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ this workplan was skipped.
|
|||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: TREV-WP-0007-T01
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "6b99a020-6892-4c79-a18d-88ffa1f8d750"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
|
@ -45,6 +45,27 @@ pause on material Development Credit, contributor diversity factors) that
|
|||
`trsl:policy:linear-longstop-v0` deliberately left unresolved per
|
||||
`specs/OpenQuestions-WorkingDefaults.md` Q7.
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** `specs/TargetDegenerationPolicyResearch.md` produced. Survey
|
||||
finding: none of BSL/FSL/Elastic actually implement progress-sensitive
|
||||
degeneration — TRSL's Development-Credit-linked model is original design
|
||||
work, not an adaptation of precedent. Input 1 (progress-sensitive pause)
|
||||
resolved with a concrete proposal: a rolling 90-day "quiet period" pause —
|
||||
Remission Credit accrues only during periods with no recent
|
||||
`development-credit` entry, and freezes (not reverses) during active
|
||||
periods. Input 2 (contributor diversity) resolved as **not adopted for
|
||||
v1** — no ledger-derivable diversity signal resists trivial gaming
|
||||
(shell/related-party entitlement holders), and no pilot data yet exists to
|
||||
validate a signal empirically; explicitly deferred, not silently dropped.
|
||||
Also resolves concept §13.3's open relationship question: the Longstop
|
||||
Date is an absolute backstop, never itself extended or paused by the
|
||||
quiet-period mechanism — pausing only changes how much remits *before*
|
||||
Longstop, never *whether* full remission happens *at* Longstop. Proposes
|
||||
candidate `trsl:policy:progress-paused-longstop-v1` with worked numeric
|
||||
example, and an explicit v0-vs-v1 comparison table (implementation cost:
|
||||
v1 requires new hosted rolling-window computation, not yet built) for T02
|
||||
to weigh — deliberately does not recommend one over the other, since that
|
||||
promotion decision belongs to T02's human gate.
|
||||
|
||||
## Degeneration formula decision (human gate)
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
|
|
@ -62,11 +83,26 @@ permanent-enough-to-launch-pilots-on status, which per `SCOPE.md` §4
|
|||
requires explicit human accept — agents may prepare the recommendation and
|
||||
leave this `todo`.
|
||||
|
||||
**Status: ready for review, not done.** Recommendation per T01 §7's
|
||||
middle path: **confirm `linear-longstop-v0` as the adopted v1 norm for
|
||||
the first pilot cohort**, and record `progress-paused-longstop-v1`
|
||||
(T01 §6) as the named next iteration rather than adopting it now. Reasoning:
|
||||
v0 is already implemented, tested (WP-0002/WP-0006), and pilot-ready today;
|
||||
v1 requires new, untested hosted-service computation (a rolling
|
||||
quiet-period window, not a formula tweak) that would sit on
|
||||
`workplans/TREV-WP-0008-governance-and-pilot-rollout.md`'s critical path
|
||||
for no proven benefit yet — the incentive-alignment improvement v1 offers
|
||||
is real but currently unvalidated by any actual pilot data. Confirming v0
|
||||
now does not foreclose v1: the policy id is versioned
|
||||
(`trsl:policy:<slug>@<version>`), so a future Phase can adopt v1 once
|
||||
implemented without touching any Phase already running under v0. Awaiting
|
||||
maintainer decision.
|
||||
|
||||
## Canonical monetization profile catalog
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: TREV-WP-0007-T03
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "063dcb0a-69b1-44a5-b95f-093b306b7040"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
|
@ -80,11 +116,26 @@ named in `specs/MonetizationExtensionSpecification.md` §5
|
|||
fixture-backed (`product-ideation`, `general-consulting`), following the
|
||||
pattern already established in `examples/phase-001/extensions/`.
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** `specs/CanonicalMonetizationProfiles.md` produced with a
|
||||
worked narrative per profile plus a cross-profile summary table (default
|
||||
allocation, whether/when it's adjustable, whether a Phase must pre-exist
|
||||
before allocation can be declared). New fixtures
|
||||
`examples/phase-001/extensions/product-ideation.json` and
|
||||
`.../general-consulting.json`, both schema-validated. Key distinction
|
||||
worked out between the two new profiles: `product-ideation` may acquire a
|
||||
nonzero allocation *later*, against a Phase that didn't yet exist at
|
||||
payment time (declared only once adoption actually happens, never
|
||||
inferred retroactively); `general-consulting` is 0% *by definition*, not
|
||||
merely by default — choosing that profile is itself the declaration that
|
||||
no allocation is intended. Added both to
|
||||
`tests/test_extension_conformance.py`'s parametrized conformance test
|
||||
(now 6 profiles, 11 tests total in that file, all passing).
|
||||
|
||||
## Canonicalization review process (light)
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: TREV-WP-0007-T04
|
||||
status: todo
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "7bbcdb3e-403c-49be-acc2-eba9e03926b9"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
|
@ -96,3 +147,19 @@ that review actually checks. Produce a short (not a full governance
|
|||
framework — that's `workplans/TREV-WP-0008-governance-and-pilot-rollout.md`
|
||||
T01) checklist for canonicalizing the six profiles in this workplan,
|
||||
sufficient to promote them from `registered` to `canonical` status.
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** `specs/CanonicalizationReviewChecklist.md` produced. An
|
||||
8-item checklist (already-registered/conformant; human re-read of the
|
||||
allocation rule beyond the heuristic check; internal consistency between
|
||||
description/pricing/allocation; realistic reversal coverage; proportionate
|
||||
evidence tier per Working Default Q10; a full worked narrative existing;
|
||||
a sanity check for regulated-financial-instrument resemblance; recorded
|
||||
sign-off) layered on top of the already-implemented mechanism
|
||||
(`registry.promote_extension_canonical`, WP-0006-T03) — this document does
|
||||
not change that mechanism, it defines what a reviewer must verify before
|
||||
calling it. Does not itself canonicalize any profile (a separate,
|
||||
attributable governance action) but flags `development-license` and
|
||||
`general-consulting` as the two structurally simplest candidates if a
|
||||
first canonicalization pass is wanted before WP-0008-T01's fuller
|
||||
governance cadence exists — offered as an observation, not a decision this
|
||||
document makes on its own.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue