Accept PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum, file TREV-WP-0015 implementation

specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md accepted 2026-08-03. Implementation
filed as its own workplan (TREV-WP-0015), seven tasks mapping 1:1 to
the addendum's sections rather than repeating field shapes/rationale:
schema change, specs/policies/ + specs/profiles/ extraction, Control
Plane reference-rendering routes, ledger UI change, forgejo_hubs
migration, backfilling the three example manifests, and tests/closeout.

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

README.md

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ Extracted and stabilized from the concept draft under `workplans/TREV-WP-0003-no
 | [`specs/TargetLedgerSpecification.md`](specs/TargetLedgerSpecification.md) | Ledger entry types, hash chain, Outstanding Target fold |
 | [`specs/MonetizationExtensionSpecification.md`](specs/MonetizationExtensionSpecification.md) | Six-field extension contract, registered vs. canonical |
 | [`specs/PhaseLifecycleUseCases.md`](specs/PhaseLifecycleUseCases.md) | Nine Phase-lifecycle use cases mapped to what's built, what's a real gap, and what has no UI by design (WP-0012-T01) |
-| [`specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md`](specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md) | Proposed schema/spec-file/UI changes from WP-0012-T02–T04's accepted decisions — repo provenance fields, `specs/policies/`/`specs/profiles/` extraction, ledger UI treatment. **Not yet accepted for implementation** (WP-0012-T05) |
+| [`specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md`](specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md) | Schema/spec-file/UI changes from WP-0012-T02–T04's accepted decisions — repo provenance fields, `specs/policies/`/`specs/profiles/` extraction, ledger UI treatment. **Accepted 2026-08-03**, implementation tracked in WP-0015 |
 
 **Forbidden synonyms:** do not treat undifferentiated "revenue captured" as equivalent to Development Credit (see `CONTRIBUTING.md` § Terminology); do not call pre-conversion software "Open Source" (see the guardrail table above).
 
@@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ The concept's §13 now defines a **Global Contingency Share Determination Rule**
 | [TREV-WP-0012](workplans/TREV-WP-0012-phase-provenance-and-policy-modeling.md) | Phase provenance, ledger reference, and degeneration-policy modeling — **finished**, all 5 tasks done. Decisions (T02–T04) synthesized into [`specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md`](specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md) (T05) — **not yet accepted for implementation**; that's the document to discuss before any schema/UI work is filed as its own workplan |
 | [TREV-WP-0013](workplans/TREV-WP-0013-remission-credit-automation.md) | Remission Credit automation (degeneration policy execution) — active; T01–T03 `wait` on WP-0012-T03's policy-spec-file decision. Nothing currently computes or writes `remission-credit` ledger entries |
 | [TREV-WP-0014](workplans/TREV-WP-0014-control-plane-extensions-breach-attestation-ui.md) | Control Plane UI: Extension Registry, Breach Records, Conversion Attestation — active; T01 next. Backend for all three already exists (WP-0006); UI-only work, not blocked on WP-0012 |
+| [TREV-WP-0015](workplans/TREV-WP-0015-phase-provenance-implementation.md) | Implement `specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md` — active; T01 (schema change) next. Seven tasks map 1:1 to the addendum's §1–§6 |
 
 Hub index: [`WORK-RECORDS.md`](WORK-RECORDS.md) · brief: [`.custodian-brief.md`](.custodian-brief.md)
 

specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md

@@ -6,11 +6,11 @@ workplan's Result sections for the full reasoning behind each) into one
 reviewable document, covering the concrete schema, spec-file, and Control
 Plane UI changes they imply.
 
-**This document proposes changes. It does not make them.** Per the
-maintainer's own established sequencing for this workplan, nothing here
-is implemented until this addendum itself is reviewed and accepted — at
-which point the implementation work is filed as its own workplan(s),
-the same way WP-0009/WP-0010 were split out of an earlier combined plan.
+**Accepted 2026-08-03.** Implementation is tracked in
+`workplans/TREV-WP-0015-phase-provenance-implementation.md`, whose seven
+tasks map 1:1 to this document's §1–§6 (this document remains the
+authoritative source for field shapes and rationale; that workplan does
+not repeat them).
 
 ---
 

workplans/TREV-WP-0015-phase-provenance-implementation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,132 @@
+---
+id: TREV-WP-0015
+type: workplan
+title: "Implement Phase provenance, spec-file, and ledger UI changes"
+domain: infotech
+repo: target-revenue
+status: active
+owner: claude
+topic_slug: infotech
+created: "2026-08-03"
+updated: "2026-08-03"
+---
+
+# Implement Phase provenance, spec-file, and ledger UI changes
+
+Implements `specs/PhaseProvenanceSpecAddendum.md`, accepted 2026-08-03,
+which itself synthesizes the decisions from
+`workplans/TREV-WP-0012-phase-provenance-and-policy-modeling.md` T02–T04.
+Task numbering below matches the addendum's §6 suggested breakdown
+1:1 — each task cites its addendum section as the authoritative source of
+what to build, rather than re-deriving field shapes or rationale here.
+
+```task
+id: TREV-WP-0015-T01
+status: todo
+priority: high
+```
+
+**Schema change** (addendum §1): add `repo_hub`, `repo_hub_uri`,
+`repo_id`, `repo_name` as required properties of
+`phase.milestone_release`, and `phase.base_phase_id` as an optional
+property of `phase`, to `schemas/phase_manifest.schema.json`. Update
+`validation.py` if the new pattern/format constraints need anything
+beyond what JSON Schema's own `pattern`/`format` keywords already
+enforce (they shouldn't). Add offline tests: a manifest missing any of
+the four new required fields is rejected; one with `base_phase_id`
+absent validates (first Phase); one with it present and correctly
+patterned validates (successive Phase).
+
+```task
+id: TREV-WP-0015-T02
+status: todo
+priority: high
+```
+
+**Spec-file extraction** (addendum §2): create `specs/policies/
+linear-longstop-v0.md` (extracted from `specs/
+OpenQuestions-WorkingDefaults.md` Q7's prose, with `policy_id`/`title`
+frontmatter); create the six `specs/profiles/*.md` files (extracted from
+`specs/CanonicalMonetizationProfiles.md` §1–§6, with `extension_id`/
+`title` frontmatter), leaving §7 (cross-profile summary) and §8
+(non-goals) in place as the overview document. Add `calculator_id`/
+`revision`/`title` frontmatter to `specs/
+DevelopmentEffortCalculatorConcept.md` (no move). Update
+`OpenQuestions-WorkingDefaults.md` Q7 to point at the new file rather
+than contain the policy's content directly.
+
+```task
+id: TREV-WP-0015-T03
+status: todo
+priority: medium
+```
+
+**Control Plane reference-rendering routes** (addendum §2): add
+`GET /reference/policies/{slug}` and `GET /reference/profiles/{slug}` to
+`service/control_plane_app.py`, rendering the corresponding
+`specs/policies/`/`specs/profiles/` markdown file to HTML server-side at
+request time (a small Python markdown library — confirm one is already
+an acceptable addition to the `service` extras in `pyproject.toml`, or
+add it). Read-only, no edit capability. Link to these routes from
+wherever a policy id or extension id already appears in
+`phase_detail.html`/`phase_new.html`.
+
+```task
+id: TREV-WP-0015-T04
+status: todo
+priority: medium
+```
+
+**Ledger UI change** (addendum §3): drop the `ledger` input from
+`phase_new.html`; have the registration route auto-compute
+`phase.ledger` as the canonical `/phases/{phase_id}/ledger` reference
+before validation/persistence. Add a small "ledger reference"
+link/disclosure to `phase_detail.html` showing the raw reference plus a
+live-data link when it resolves to this same instance. The existing
+Ledger entries table is untouched.
+
+```task
+id: TREV-WP-0015-T05
+status: todo
+priority: high
+```
+
+**`forgejo_hubs` migration** (addendum §4): new migration
+`migrations/0007_forgejo_hubs.sql`, table `forgejo_hubs (hub_slug
+PRIMARY KEY, service_uri, first_seen_at, updated_at)`, auto-populated on
+first sight of a `repo_hub` during Phase registration (mirroring
+`ensure_licensor_identity`'s auto-create-on-first-INSERT trigger
+pattern in `migrations/0005_licensor_credentials.sql`). Decide during
+implementation (not a T02-style human gate, per the addendum) whether
+correcting a hub's URI after the fact is a `SECURITY DEFINER` governance
+action or a plain `UPDATE`, and document whichever is chosen.
+
+```task
+id: TREV-WP-0015-T06
+status: todo
+priority: medium
+```
+
+**Backfill the three example manifests** (addendum §5):
+`examples/pilot-candidates/{net-kingdom-local-identity,
+railiance-vergabe-teilnahme, info-tech-canon-service-surface}/manifest.json`
+each get `repo_hub`/`repo_hub_uri`/`repo_id`/`repo_name` from their real
+Forgejo data (`GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}`, same call already
+confirmed working for `target-revenue` itself during WP-0012-T02), no
+`base_phase_id` (all three are first Phases), and `ledger` set to match
+what the Control Plane would now auto-compute.
+
+```task
+id: TREV-WP-0015-T07
+status: todo
+priority: high
+```
+
+**Tests, docs, and closeout**: offline schema/validation tests (T01),
+Docker-gated `TestClient` tests for T03's new routes and T04/T05's
+changes (extending `tests/test_control_plane_app.py`), a rendering smoke
+test that each `specs/policies/`/`specs/profiles/` file actually renders
+without error. Update `README.md`'s WP-0015 row and this workplan's
+Result sections; run the full offline + Docker-gated suite; fence-count
+check before committing any workplan edit, per this project's standing
+practice.