Ting/Jostoph
Watch
2
0
Fork
You've already forked Jostoph
 2
Code Issues 57 Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Reconcile ratified organisation labels without deletion #87

New issue
Open
opened 2026-08-16 06:01:59 +00:00 by codexo · 2 comments
codexo commented 2026-08-16 06:01:59 +00:00
Contributor
Copy link

Mandate

Following the completed ratification and migration in Ting/Ting#25, Ting, lar.ad, and swarm MUST define the ratified advanced label set as organisation-level labels. Repository-local labels remain exceptions only where the ratification table says they are local.

The ratification prerequisite and manual cutover are complete; comment 6798 preserves their evidence. This remaining work implements the durable declarative reconciler.

Jostoph reconciliation workflow

  1. Keep the canonical label specification in Jostoph's declarative Forgejo configuration, with one explicit organisation set for Ting, lar.ad, and swarm.
  2. Encode the advanced workflow vocabulary as the shared base: Compat/Breaking; Kind/{Bug,Documentation,Enhancement,Feature,Security,Testing}; Priority/{Critical,High,Medium,Low}; Reviewed/{Confirmed,Curated,Duplicate,Invalid,Won't Fix}; and Status/{Abandoned,Blocked,Conflicted,In Progress,In Review,Need More Info}. Follow #25’s ratified declaration, including Status/Ready, Status/Need Grooming, and the ratified Meta labels; do not re-open the completed vocabulary decision. Keep host Scope and Topic labels local unless separately ratified. Do not invent or retire pi:fix without evidence and ratification.
  3. Have Jostoph reconcile observed organisation labels against that declaration: create missing ratified labels and repair description/color drift only in an explicit apply mode; report undeclared labels, aliases, and use-risk as findings. It MUST NOT delete or rename labels automatically.
  4. Make the check idempotent and run it in Jostoph's normal conformance/effects workflow, producing an audit-log record of declared, performed, and refused effects.
  5. Require a re-audit of issue/PR usages and automation references before any future rename, migration, archival, or deletion. Each such change remains an owner-ratified migration, not a reconciler side effect.
  6. Add tests proving that the desired set is complete, Reviewed/Curated keeps its existing machine meaning, unprefixed legacy state names are reported as aliases, and a hand-created/undeclared label is never deleted by reconciliation.

Acceptance

  • The post-ratification org-level sets are declared for Ting, lar.ad, and swarm.
  • Reconciliation is read-only by default and auditable when applied.
  • Missing labels and metadata drift can be repaired only from the ratified declaration.
  • Undeclared labels and aliases are findings, never destructive actions.
  • Tests cover idempotence and the non-deletion guarantee.
  • The implementation links back to Ting/Ting#25 and records the ratification it follows.

Separated execution ownership

  • Ting/Jostoph#121 owns hierarchy and Deliverable-record diagnostics.
  • Ting/Jostoph#122 owns governed repository-template distribution and drift reporting.
  • Ting/Ting#29 retains hierarchy-law and template-definition ownership.

This issue owns organisation-label reconciliation only. Scope references do not create parent edges from this Deliverable. The exact Epic parent and the immutable applicable OpenSpec binding remain grooming gaps.

Provenance and delivery state

Larandar approved the split in estate-backlog-rationalization.md on 2026-09-07. Scope source: Ting/Jostoph#87. Contradiction ledger: Ting/Ting#28.

The current normative store is Ting/contracts. The exact applicable change, immutable commit, and selected requirement/scenario binding remain to be verified and recorded; this issue remains Status/Need Grooming and is not newly marked Ready. This tracker split is not implementation or deployment evidence.

## Mandate Following the completed ratification and migration in [Ting/Ting#25](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Ting/issues/25), **Ting, lar.ad, and swarm MUST define the ratified advanced label set as organisation-level labels**. Repository-local labels remain exceptions only where the ratification table says they are local. The ratification prerequisite and manual cutover are complete; [comment 6798](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Jostoph/issues/87#issuecomment-6798) preserves their evidence. This remaining work implements the durable declarative reconciler. ## Jostoph reconciliation workflow 1. Keep the canonical label specification in Jostoph's declarative Forgejo configuration, with one explicit organisation set for Ting, lar.ad, and swarm. 2. Encode the advanced workflow vocabulary as the shared base: `Compat/Breaking`; `Kind/{Bug,Documentation,Enhancement,Feature,Security,Testing}`; `Priority/{Critical,High,Medium,Low}`; `Reviewed/{Confirmed,Curated,Duplicate,Invalid,Won't Fix}`; and `Status/{Abandoned,Blocked,Conflicted,In Progress,In Review,Need More Info}`. Follow #25’s ratified declaration, including `Status/Ready`, `Status/Need Grooming`, and the ratified Meta labels; do not re-open the completed vocabulary decision. Keep host Scope and Topic labels local unless separately ratified. Do not invent or retire `pi:fix` without evidence and ratification. 3. Have Jostoph reconcile observed organisation labels against that declaration: create missing ratified labels and repair description/color drift only in an explicit apply mode; report undeclared labels, aliases, and use-risk as findings. It MUST NOT delete or rename labels automatically. 4. Make the check idempotent and run it in Jostoph's normal conformance/effects workflow, producing an audit-log record of declared, performed, and refused effects. 5. Require a re-audit of issue/PR usages and automation references before any future rename, migration, archival, or deletion. Each such change remains an owner-ratified migration, not a reconciler side effect. 6. Add tests proving that the desired set is complete, `Reviewed/Curated` keeps its existing machine meaning, unprefixed legacy state names are reported as aliases, and a hand-created/undeclared label is never deleted by reconciliation. ## Acceptance - [ ] The post-ratification org-level sets are declared for Ting, lar.ad, and swarm. - [ ] Reconciliation is read-only by default and auditable when applied. - [ ] Missing labels and metadata drift can be repaired only from the ratified declaration. - [ ] Undeclared labels and aliases are findings, never destructive actions. - [ ] Tests cover idempotence and the non-deletion guarantee. - [ ] The implementation links back to Ting/Ting#25 and records the ratification it follows. ## Separated execution ownership - [Ting/Jostoph#121](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Jostoph/issues/121) owns hierarchy and Deliverable-record diagnostics. - [Ting/Jostoph#122](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Jostoph/issues/122) owns governed repository-template distribution and drift reporting. - [Ting/Ting#29](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Ting/issues/29) retains hierarchy-law and template-definition ownership. This issue owns organisation-label reconciliation only. Scope references do not create parent edges from this Deliverable. The exact Epic parent and the immutable applicable OpenSpec binding remain grooming gaps. ## Provenance and delivery state Larandar approved the split in estate-backlog-rationalization.md on 2026-09-07. Scope source: [Ting/Jostoph#87](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Jostoph/issues/87). Contradiction ledger: [Ting/Ting#28](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Ting/issues/28). The current normative store is Ting/contracts. The exact applicable change, immutable commit, and selected requirement/scenario binding remain to be verified and recorded; this issue remains Status/Need Grooming and is not newly marked Ready. This tracker split is not implementation or deployment evidence.
codexo commented 2026-08-16 06:21:54 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

Grooming state: Approved split applied; contract and hierarchy binding remain incomplete.
Evidence: Ting/Ting#25 comments 6721, 6722, and 6792 resolve ratification and manual migration.
Ownership: Label reconciliation remains here; diagnostics are Ting/Jostoph#121 and template distribution is Ting/Jostoph#122.
Remaining: Verify the exact Epic parent and immutable Ting/contracts binding. No parent was inferred from a leaf-to-leaf scope reference. The earlier implementation-ready claim does not establish these current delivery gates.
Ledger: Ting/Ting#28.

<!-- codexo:groom:v1 --> **Grooming state:** Approved split applied; contract and hierarchy binding remain incomplete. **Evidence:** Ting/Ting#25 comments [6721](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Ting/issues/25#issuecomment-6721), [6722](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Ting/issues/25#issuecomment-6722), and [6792](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Ting/issues/25#issuecomment-6792) resolve ratification and manual migration. **Ownership:** Label reconciliation remains here; diagnostics are [Ting/Jostoph#121](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Jostoph/issues/121) and template distribution is [Ting/Jostoph#122](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Jostoph/issues/122). **Remaining:** Verify the exact Epic parent and immutable Ting/contracts binding. No parent was inferred from a leaf-to-leaf scope reference. The earlier implementation-ready claim does not establish these current delivery gates. **Ledger:** [Ting/Ting#28](https://jo.et0.pw/Ting/Ting/issues/28).
larandar changed title from Proposal: Jostoph-maintained advanced organisation label conformance to Reconcile ratified organisation labels without deletion 2026-09-07 06:09:42 +00:00
larandar commented 2026-09-20 03:48:50 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Audit 2026-09-19/20, G25: narrow this mandate to the provider-owned Ting surface. The Jostoph declaration deliberately omits lar.ad and has no swarm entry; this pass chooses narrowing over adding declarations. Authoritative cross-reference: Ting/Ting#25 and the existing Jostoph label/ownership rulings. The alternative of declaring lar.ad and swarm here was declined in this pass.

<!-- larandar:groom:v1 --> Audit 2026-09-19/20, G25: narrow this mandate to the provider-owned Ting surface. The Jostoph declaration deliberately omits lar.ad and has no swarm entry; this pass chooses narrowing over adding declarations. Authoritative cross-reference: Ting/Ting#25 and the existing Jostoph label/ownership rulings. The alternative of declaring lar.ad and swarm here was declined in this pass.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
main
fastlane
tango/103-lifecycle-audit
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels
  
Compat/Breaking
Breaking change that won't be backward compatible

  
Kind/Bug
Something is not working

  
Kind/Documentation
Documentation changes

  
Kind/Enhancement
Improve existing functionality

  
Kind/Feature
New functionality

  
Kind/Security
This is security issue

  
Kind/Testing
Issue or pull request related to testing

  
Meta/Campaign
Campaign grouping node; dependencies name its direct Epics

  
Meta/Epic
Epic grouping node; dependencies name its direct Sessions

  
Meta/Session
Session delivery bundle; dependencies name its direct leaf issues

  
Priority/Critical
The priority is critical

  
Priority/High
The priority is high

  
Priority/Low
The priority is low

  
Priority/Medium
The priority is medium

  
Reviewed/Confirmed
Issue has been confirmed

  
Reviewed/Curated
PR LABEL: merge by rebase/ff to preserve the commit line; absence means squash. Set by the AUTHOR. (Curation itself is a duty on every PR — the label only picks the merge style.)

  
Reviewed/Duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists

  
Reviewed/Invalid
Invalid issue

  
Reviewed/Won't Fix
This issue won't be fixed

  
Scope/Campaign
Umbrella issue grouping a coherent multi-issue campaign.

  
Status/Abandoned
Somebody has started to work on this but abandoned work

  
Status/Blocked
Something is blocking this issue or pull request

  
Status/Conflicted
STATE: steward rebase failed; work returned to its agent, with evidence.

  
Status/In Progress
STATE: claimed, workspace active. Exactly one assignee, or none when idle.

  
Status/In Review
STATE: PR open against fastlane. Set by steward (PR webhook).

  
Status/Need Grooming
Issue body and comments do not yet conform to the Deliverable record; grooming required.

  
Status/Need More Info
Feedback is required to reproduce issue or to continue work

  
Status/Ready
Ready for execution; no known blocker prevents useful work from starting.

No labels
Compat/Breaking
Kind/Bug
Kind/Documentation
Kind/Enhancement
Kind/Feature
Kind/Security
Kind/Testing
Meta/Campaign
Meta/Epic
Meta/Session
Priority/Critical
Priority/High
Priority/Low
Priority/Medium
Reviewed/Confirmed
Reviewed/Curated
Reviewed/Duplicate
Reviewed/Invalid
Reviewed/Won't Fix
Scope/Campaign
Status/Abandoned
Status/Blocked
Status/Conflicted
Status/In Progress
Status/In Review
Status/Need Grooming
Status/Need More Info
Status/Ready
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference
Ting/Jostoph#87
No description provided.