Record executor-worker resolution: no new repo, archived locally

Maintainer decision, 2026-07-30: rein-aharness is executor-worker's
real, live successor - no coulomb/executor-worker Forgejo repo will
be created. Local directory moved to
archive/260717-executor-worker-retired/ (timestamped to its actual
retirement commit date) to get it out of the active workstation
directory listing; git history preserved intact by the move.
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-07-30 09:33:01 +02:00
parent 7cbe40430a
commit 5cca55fcc9

View file

@ -69,17 +69,13 @@ lineage; `rein-aharness` already is that repo, already has its own
`INTENT.md`-equivalent scope, and is deployed live on Railiance for
tenant `binky-control`.
**Open question for the maintainer, not resolved here:** should a
`coulomb/executor-worker` Forgejo repo still be created purely to hold
this retired prototype's git history for the record, or is that history
adequately preserved by staying local-only (as it is today) /
folded into `rein-aharness`'s own history if it isn't already? Creating a
new remote repo is a real, if small, infrastructure action — this
document deliberately stops short of doing that without asking, since the
investigation itself changed the premise of the original request (the
maintainer's message assumed executor-worker might need "establishing";
it turns out its function is already fully established elsewhere, under
a different, twice-renamed name).
**Resolved (maintainer, 2026-07-30):** no `coulomb/executor-worker`
Forgejo repo will be created — `rein-aharness` is the real, live
successor and already carries the lineage forward. The local directory
was moved to `~/archive/260717-executor-worker-retired/` (timestamp is
the repo's own actual retirement date, per its `retire: prototype adopted
into agent-harness` commit) to get it out of the way of the active
workstation directory listing, git history preserved intact by the move.
## 3. Full architecture map (verified against each repo's own SCOPE/README/ADRs)