diff --git a/history/260730-ExecutorRepos-ArchitectureFindings.md b/history/260730-ExecutorRepos-ArchitectureFindings.md
index 6aa92cc..27a2865 100644
--- a/history/260730-ExecutorRepos-ArchitectureFindings.md
+++ b/history/260730-ExecutorRepos-ArchitectureFindings.md
@@ -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)