Maintainer chose info-tech-canon (outside the original four product lines) as the actual first repo to build up the practical Phase-declaration routine on, explicitly confirmed as a dry run, not a T05 go-live decision. Adds a third draft, non-binding manifest (examples/pilot-candidates/info-tech-canon-service-surface/): the cumulative service surface across ITC-WP-0001-0012 (all finished), Product-defining (100x). Flags a notable complication rather than smoothing it over: this repo's current LICENSE is already MIT-0, so a real Phase here would mean replacing an already-open license with restricted pre-conversion TRSL terms - a materially different step than the other two candidates. Exercised the full onboarding routine end-to-end against a real, ephemeral local instance of the hosted Trust Service (Docker Postgres, migrations applied, binky Licensor token seeded, uvicorn running the actual service/app.py): register-phase -> append-entry -> status all worked via scripts/trf_onboard.py exactly as specs/TrustServiceOnboarding.md describes, no code changes needed. Dry-run infrastructure torn down afterward; only the draft manifest files persist.
11 KiB
Pilot Phase Candidate Survey
Status: Draft v0.1
Date: 2026-07-29
Workplan: workplans/TREV-WP-0008-governance-and-pilot-rollout.md T02
Feeds: workplans/TREV-WP-0008-governance-and-pilot-rollout.md T03 (draft pilot Phase Manifests)
Primary artifacts: specs/TargetRevenueFrameworkCore.md §1.4 (Target Multiple)
Surveys coulomb-loop, net-kingdom, helix-forge, and the
railiance-* family for one plausible first Milestone Release candidate
per product line — a bounded, recently- or soon-to-be-completed piece of
work with a defensible Target Multiple classification, not an arbitrary
pick. The state hub's get_repo_goals returned no data for
coulomb-loop, net-kingdom, or helix-forge at survey time, so this
relied on direct repo inspection (README/SCOPE.md, git log, workplans/)
instead, per the task's own fallback instruction.
This is a candidate survey, not a Phase declaration. Nothing here authorizes any real Phase — that remains gated behind T05.
1. coulomb-loop — no defensible candidate found
One-liner: "Customer engagement repository for Coulomb fleet self-improvement loops — contracts, rosters, and activity definitions; not agent runtime" (SCOPE.md). Its own scope explicitly excludes "application code for Coulomb products" — this repo organizes how other repos get worked on, it does not itself contain a product.
Recent activity: workplan-first agent guidance, instruction
regeneration from state-hub templates, .repo-classification.yaml setup —
all internal coordination tooling, not customer-facing capability.
Recommendation: no candidate. Forcing a pick here would violate the
task's own "not an arbitrary pick" instruction — this repo is
infrastructure for how work happens, not a governed software capability
a Customer would pay for. Revisit if coulomb-loop's scope changes, or
treat product Phases for Coulomb-managed products as living in those
products' own repos rather than here.
2. net-kingdom — candidate: Local Identity (NK-WP-0002)
One-liner: "Platform domain for NetKingdom identity and security
services" (SCOPE.md) — a real product domain, unlike coulomb-loop.
Candidate: NK-WP-0002 — "Local Identity: Bootstrap User Store &
Minimal OIDC" (finished 2026-03-05). A zero-dependency, file-based user
management capability deriving the primary user from the Linux identity,
auto-generating test users, and (Stage 3) providing a minimal native OIDC
provider for dev/test use — a standalone, bounded capability a Kubernetes
deployment without a running Keycloak/full IAM stack yet could adopt
independently.
Passed over:
NK-WP-0001(Keycloak SSO/MFA Platform) — statusDEFERRED, superseded byNK-WP-0003(KeyCape + Authelia + LLDAP). Not a clean "finished" candidate; the stack it targeted is no longer the deployed one.NET-WP-0020(OpenBao unseal custody models),NK-WP-0021(activity-core ops/Temporal UI least-privilege SSO) — both finished and real, but both are operational hardening of NetKingdom's own infrastructure (secrets custody, internal operator access control), not a bounded capability an external Customer would license. These are exactly the kind of "internal-infra, necessary but not product-shaped" work the task's Target Multiple guidance is meant to screen out.NK-WP-0022/NK-WP-0023(railiance01 identity cutover, user-engine portal integration) — currentlyactive, not yet a "finished" candidate.
Indicative Target Multiple classification: Incremental (10x) — NK-WP-0002 is a material, standalone enhancement (bootstrap identity without a full IAM stack dependency) rather than a net-new platform (1000x) or mere cost recovery (1x); it is a real, reusable capability, not a from-scratch new market (100x-class "product-defining" would overstate a bootstrap utility component).
3. helix-forge — no candidate; explicitly pre-product
One-liner: "HelixForge defines a capability-first development ecosystem for turning human intent into governed, reusable software capabilities" — but its own SCOPE.md states plainly: "It is not yet an application implementation."
Recommendation: no candidate, and this is not a survey gap — the repo itself says it is not yet at the implementation stage a Milestone Release requires. Revisit once HelixForge produces an actual implemented capability, not its current intent/architecture/vocabulary artifacts.
4. railiance-* family — candidate: vergabe-teilnahme (railiance-apps / RAILIANCE-WP-0002)
Surveyed all ten repos (railiance-apps, -bootstrap [not found under
this exact name at survey time], -cluster, -enablement, -fabric,
-forge, -hosts, -infra, -master, -platform).
Candidate: RAILIANCE-WP-0002 (railiance-apps, finished 2026-05-19,
refreshed by RAILIANCE-WP-0014 finished 2026-07-11) — deployed
vergabe-teilnahme, a Django application supporting participation in
German public-sector procurement ("Vergabe") processes, to production at
https://vergabe-teilnahme.whywhynot.de, with its own PostgreSQL
database, container registry image, HTTPS/cert-manager TLS, and an
operator runbook.
Why this is the strongest candidate across the whole family: it is the only deliverable found across all ten repos that is genuinely product-shaped — a discrete, customer-facing application a business that participates in public tenders could plausibly license or subscribe to. Everything else surveyed is internal infrastructure necessary to keep the Railiance stack itself running:
| Repo | What was found | Why passed over |
|---|---|---|
railiance-cluster |
Kubernetes substrate (k3s, Helm, ingress, CNI), most recently a Knative serving install | Infra plumbing, not customer-facing |
railiance-enablement |
CI/CD templates, SDKs, buildpacks | Internal developer tooling |
railiance-fabric |
Ecosystem graph/registry modeling repo-family relations | Internal ontology/graph plumbing |
railiance-forge |
Forgejo/Gitea, registries, Actions runners | Internal build/artifact infra |
railiance-hosts |
Legacy Terraform/Ansible server provisioning, being retired in favor of railiance-infra |
Superseded internal infra |
railiance-infra |
Canonical infra substrate (successor to -hosts); recent finished work is a Forgejo production migration |
Internal ops |
railiance-master |
Repo taxonomy, cross-repo ADRs — architecture home, not even code-shaped | Organizational restructuring, not software |
railiance-platform |
Shared platform services (Postgres HA, cache, secrets, identity, object storage); recent finished work is a secrets-management extraction boundary | Internal platform plumbing |
Indicative Target Multiple classification: Product-defining (100x)
— vergabe-teilnahme is a real, market-facing application serving a
specific commercial use case (public-tender participation management),
not merely cost recovery or an incremental internal enhancement; whether
it in fact represents a new platform (1000x) depends on ambitions beyond
this survey's scope (e.g., whether it becomes a multi-tenant SaaS offering
vs. a single-deployment tool) — 100x is the defensible default absent
that broader roadmap information.
4a. info-tech-canon — added 2026-07-29, maintainer-selected first repo
Outside this survey's original four product lines, the maintainer
selected info-tech-canon directly as the actual first repo to build up
the practical Phase-declaration routine on — confirmed explicitly as a
dry run, not a go-live decision (examples/pilot-candidates/README.md).
One-liner: "Building interoperable, adaptable, and extensible information-processing systems" — InfoTechCanon: a markdown-first canon of standards/models plus a real, running service surface (CLI, importable Python service functions, a local JSON/HTTP API) built on top of it.
Candidate: the cumulative service surface across all twelve finished
workplans (ITC-WP-0001 through ITC-WP-0012, all status: finished,
most recently ITC-WP-0012 "Canonical Repository Layout Standard
Integration," commit f7ad73d) — the kernel, service surface (CLI +
JSON + local HTTP API), validation/indexing, a worked "small SaaS"
profile proof, and consumer-facing review-kit/alignment tooling, all
already used by at least one other repo in this ecosystem
(ITC-WP-0008 explicitly supports railiance-fabric conformance).
Notable complication, flagged rather than smoothed over: this repo's
current LICENSE is already MIT-0 — fully permissive today. A real
Phase declaration for this repo (unlike net-kingdom/railiance-apps,
which are not currently under any delayed-open-source license) would
require replacing an already-open license with the restricted
pre-conversion TRSL terms, not merely adding a monetization layer to a
previously-closed codebase. That is a materially different, and more
visible, change than the other two candidates involve — one more reason
the maintainer's dry-run-only choice here is the right call before any
real T05 decision.
Indicative Target Multiple classification: Product-defining (100x) — a real, differentiated, reusable standards-and-service capability that other repos already depend on, not mere cost recovery or an incremental tweak; not classified 1000x ("platform-defining") absent evidence it constitutes a new platform/market/ecosystem beyond its current consumer base.
5. Summary table for T03
| Product line | Candidate | Status | Indicative Target Multiple |
|---|---|---|---|
coulomb-loop |
None | — | — |
net-kingdom |
NK-WP-0002 Local Identity |
Finished 2026-03-05 | Incremental (10x) |
helix-forge |
None (pre-product) | — | — |
railiance-* |
vergabe-teilnahme (RAILIANCE-WP-0002/-0014) |
Finished 2026-05-19 / refreshed 2026-07-11 | Product-defining (100x) |
info-tech-canon |
Service surface (ITC-WP-0001–0012) |
All finished, latest 2026-06-13 | Product-defining (100x) |
Two of the original four product lines (net-kingdom, railiance-*)
have a defensible candidate; two (coulomb-loop, helix-forge) do not,
for principled reasons stated above, not because the survey was shallow.
info-tech-canon was added afterward as the maintainer's own choice for
the first practical dry run, not part of the original four-product-line
survey. T03's draft, non-binding worked Phase Manifest examples should be
built from real candidates only — inventing manifests for repos not yet
at a stage this framework applies to would misrepresent them.
6. Non-goals
- Declaring any real Phase — gated behind T05 regardless of what this survey finds.
- Selecting a Target Multiple value with legal or financial finality — the
classifications above are indicative, per
specs/TargetRevenueFrameworkCore.md§1.4's own framing ("a product and commercial hypothesis, not an objectively measurable claim"). - Re-surveying
coulomb-loop/helix-forgeon a schedule — revisit opportunistically when either repo's own scope changes, not on a fixed cadence this document sets.