docs: re-vendor .ceremony/ from ceremony 0.6.3
Some checks failed
ci / test (push) Has been cancelled
Some checks failed
ci / test (push) Has been cancelled
#39 moved the two workflow callers to 0.6.3 but left the doctrine mirror at 0.6.1, so BUILDER.md was missing the three clauses that govern signal-then-ready (ceremony#330, the undraft order, and ceremony#336). Re-vendored all six manifest files and moved the pin recorded in .ceremony/README.md.
This commit is contained in:
parent
125e44afe9
commit
cca75fef3e
1 changed files with 25 additions and 8 deletions
|
|
@ -33,7 +33,10 @@ triage bug, and the move is to say so on the issue, not to guess.
|
|||
re-requests posted, by head and not by verdict (steps 1–2). A red check
|
||||
at the head takes it out of this shape: the next move is yours;
|
||||
3. every remaining acceptance criterion is operator-owned, stated so by
|
||||
triage on the issue;
|
||||
triage on the issue. **An operator-owned remainder parks the claim and
|
||||
never the handoff**: this shape is reached only from the far side of
|
||||
shape 4, because it is the state finishing the work puts you in and
|
||||
would otherwise excuse the handoff it should follow (#336);
|
||||
4. it is **handed off** — round passed, no `blocker:*` standing,
|
||||
`state:needs-human` set per Handoff, the merge the human's. Shapes 2
|
||||
and 4 are sequential and never overlap;
|
||||
|
|
@ -137,8 +140,8 @@ triage bug, and the move is to say so on the issue, not to guess.
|
|||
its red-flag profile are in REVIEWER.md §What you review against, item 2
|
||||
(#216).
|
||||
- **Scope discipline: the PR does the issue — whole, and nothing else.**
|
||||
Adjacent problems go to a discussion, or a comment on the relevant issue;
|
||||
you do not mint issues — nobody but triage does — and you do not fix
|
||||
Adjacent problems go to a proposal, or a comment on the relevant issue;
|
||||
you do not mint work issues — nobody but triage does — and you do not fix
|
||||
drive-by findings in the same PR.
|
||||
|
||||
## The review round
|
||||
|
|
@ -174,7 +177,9 @@ such as the panel roster live in that repo's own CONTRIBUTING.)
|
|||
blocking (#139, #276). **Then classify that entry by `conclusion`, never
|
||||
`status`**, which can disagree with it (#259). No conclusion is not
|
||||
green: a configured run in progress is waited on, and waiting is
|
||||
compliance, not a stall. Cancelled or stale is not green, *stale* being a
|
||||
compliance, not a stall — the wait is the **request's**, and never a
|
||||
reason to withhold the declaration that a round was answered (step 2).
|
||||
Cancelled or stale is not green, *stale* being a
|
||||
superseded head's check, which a head-scoped rollup never shows. Skipped
|
||||
or neutral is green, those being deliberate "passed / not applicable"
|
||||
conclusions. No checks configured is green — the third ruled case, not an
|
||||
|
|
@ -200,8 +205,19 @@ such as the panel roster live in that repo's own CONTRIBUTING.)
|
|||
head, and its mechanism is crew's to describe (#94). **The re-request
|
||||
carries the same green-check-at-head precondition**, argued exception
|
||||
included: a fix push whose check comes up red is your next fix, not the
|
||||
panel's. Prefer verification over argument — add the test that settles
|
||||
the doubt.
|
||||
panel's. **Where an engine mediates the request, that precondition binds
|
||||
the engine's act and not yours**: declaring a round answered is not
|
||||
requesting the panel, so declare it as soon as the round's fixes are
|
||||
pushed and stop. The engine holds the request while the head is pending
|
||||
or red, so an early declaration cannot produce an early request while a
|
||||
withheld one is indistinguishable from a session that died (#330).
|
||||
**Never wait on an event you have no wake for** — where the engine is
|
||||
what observes the check settling, the wait is the engine's to keep
|
||||
(#330). **Never block on a producer you cannot prove alive either**:
|
||||
where a job signals its own completion, that signal is the wake and the
|
||||
finished output is read afterwards, because a follow on a file nothing is
|
||||
writing cannot tell *not yet* from *never* (#336). Prefer verification
|
||||
over argument — add the test that settles the doubt.
|
||||
3. Never dismiss a review, never merge, never mark your own work as passed.
|
||||
A blocking point you disagree with is answered with evidence or escalated
|
||||
in the PR; silence and force-forward are not options, and a panel
|
||||
|
|
@ -218,8 +234,9 @@ may draft a PR but only the builder undrafts it. **Where a draft suppressed
|
|||
the checks, green is proven at the flip and the request still follows it** —
|
||||
marking ready runs the checks the draft held back, so the order is flip, let
|
||||
the head answer, then request, step 1's precondition and not a second one.
|
||||
Waiting there is compliance, and `blocker:unrequested` does not fire while a
|
||||
head's checks are pending or red (#236).
|
||||
Waiting there is compliance — again the request's wait, not the
|
||||
declaration's — and `blocker:unrequested` does not fire while a head's
|
||||
checks are pending or red (#236).
|
||||
|
||||
## The ruling ask
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue