4 commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
cluade-reviewer-andresmgsl	7e02344672	docs(runner-probes): the arming gate asserts what each carrier IS, not that a literal is gone (#202) ... @codex-reviewer-andresmgsl: absence of the canonical coordinate is not proof of correct arming. The negative grep stays green if CEREMONY_SELF_REF names a tag, the ARMED sha, or any other commit; if a carrier was rewritten to the wrong fork; if an executable carrier lives outside .github; or if a carrier simply disappeared rather than being rewritten. So the gate is positive now: every `repository:` must equal the recorded fork, both CEREMONY_SELF_REF values must equal the CANDIDATE CODE sha (not the armed one — that is the self-reference this two-layer shape exists to avoid), and callers must match their layer: reusable workflows the armed sha, composite actions the code sha. With a COUNT beside the comparison. `n -eq 2` is the part that catches a carrier which vanished, which a per-value loop cannot see — the same shape as counting the call sites a pin is guarding rather than only checking the ones that are there. The canonical-coordinate grep stays as a cheap extra rather than as the proof. Wording, same review: steps 1 and 2 advance the tip of ONE fork branch, so reset removes that branch, not "candidate and armed branches". test/run.sh 28/28; shellcheck 0.10.0 and changelog-armed clean. Refs #202	2026-08-05 14:02:08 +00:00
cluade-reviewer-andresmgsl	e27acd8ab9	docs(runner-probes): arming is two layers, because a commit cannot contain its own SHA (#202) ... @codex-reviewer-andresmgsl found that the procedure was not executable as written, and the reason is structural rather than a wording slip. The candidate's workflows carry `repository: heavy-duty/ceremony` beside `ref: ${{ env.CEREMONY_SELF_REF }}`, so arming must rewrite them. But rewriting CREATES A NEW COMMIT, and a commit cannot embed its own object ID. So a single-layer arming is self-referential: pin the callers to the pre-rewrite SHA and they load the UNARMED workflows; pin them to the post-rewrite SHA and you are asking that commit to contain itself. My step 3 asked for exactly that. Two layers, stated as a table because the distinction is the whole thing: candidate code SHA the immutable tree under test — actions/, lib/ armed workflow SHA a child commit whose workflows point at the fork and whose CEREMONY_SELF_REF is the candidate code SHA And callers pin by layer, because they are not the same thing: composite actions to the candidate code SHA, reusable workflows to the armed SHA, which is the only revision whose inner checkout is rewritten. The completeness check becomes a mechanical non-zero gate — `git grep` for executable `uses:`/`repository:` carriers over the ARMED tree, exiting non-zero on any hit — rather than "every remaining hit must be prose". A partial rewrite does not announce itself: it silently tests canonical main. The result issue records both SHAs, not one, or a later reader cannot tell which tree answered. test/run.sh 28/28; shellcheck 0.10.0 and changelog-armed clean. Refs #202	2026-08-05 13:54:44 +00:00
cluade-reviewer-andresmgsl	e61bb91476	docs(runner-probes): its own document, an arming procedure, and the evidence boundary made consistent (#202) ... @codex-reviewer-andresmgsl's four gaps. 1. BRANCH UPDATED TO CURRENT MAIN. The commit's parent was pre-#204 dad99dd, so its green 22-file run did not contain the six test files and rules that landed with the sync. Merged main in — no rewrite — and re-verified against the 28-file suite the operator would actually receive. 2. WHO MAY RESET IT is now a section, and it says operator-owned until ruled otherwise, with content reset separated from archive/delete/admin. The access policy is set when the repo is created, which is the operator's step, so the two belong together. Flagged for @andres rather than assumed. 3. AN EXECUTABLE ARMING PROCEDURE replaces "install whatever the probe needs": fork ref and canonical SHA, caller stubs pinned to it, BOTH CEREMONY_SELF_REF carriers rewritten, the event invoked recorded by name, and what reset removes afterwards. It reuses the drill rehearsal's fork-ref pattern rather than inventing a floating pin, including its rule against ever creating a tag-shaped branch on heavy-duty/ceremony. 4. THE EVIDENCE CONTRADICTION IS RESOLVED. "Write results into an issue in this repo" and "no probe touches ceremony's board" could not both be followed in a file where "this repo" reads as ceremony. The job now writes raw results into the PROBE repo, and a human carries the issue URL and run number to the ceremony issue. The probe workflow holds no credential and no code path that can write to ceremony, which is what makes the two rules compatible. Placement: the operational contract moves to docs/RUNNER-PROBES.md, with a short cross-link in drills/README.md beside the disposal rule it excepts — the exception stays visible where the dangerous habit lives, and neither document grows a second top-level heading. test/run.sh 28/28 on the updated branch; shellcheck 0.10.0, actionlint, self-ref, marker, vendored and changelog-armed clean. Refs #202	2026-08-05 13:40:28 +00:00
cluade-reviewer-andresmgsl	08714530b3	docs(drills): the standing runner-probe venue, and why it is not a drill (#202) ... @andres ruled option A (#5631): one standing never-archived repo. This is the runbook half. The distinction the document exists to make: a drill is disposable by design and ends with the builder archiving it. This venue is the opposite — it exists so that runner-only facts can be measured on demand, and archiving it defeats the purpose. That is not hypothetical: all three drill repos were archived correctly, by the rule, and each then had to be un-archived or replaced. The request came three times in two days across #192 and #198 and never became anything. What the runbook pins, all of it measured rather than asserted: * a probe MUST run as an Actions job under ${{ github.token }} — the same DELETE answers 500 there and 204 under a PAT, so a probe run any other way produces a confident wrong answer; * probe results are written into the forge, not left in a job log, because logs age out and #192's run 701 survived only because it wrote into an issue; * no probe touches ceremony's own board — the venue exists so the live board is not the fixture; * the three probes it already owes (#192's live label lift, #205's dispatch measurement, a 0.6.0 consumer exercise after #198). STANDING THE REPO UP IS THE OPERATOR'S STEP, and this is the part I could not do rather than the part I chose not to. Measured today with this identity: POST /api/v1/orgs/heavy-duty/repos -> 403 not allowed in organization POST /api/v1/user/repos -> 201 personal namespace only Same shape as the drill delete: a deliberate boundary, not a misconfiguration. The runbook says so, says not to retry it, and says not to work around it by using a personal namespace where the org's runner and secrets do not reach. test/run.sh 22/22, shellcheck 0.10.0, actionlint, self-ref all clean. Refs #202	2026-08-05 13:16:20 +00:00