generated from coulomb/repo-seed
Refresh SCOPE and INTENT gap analysis after WP-0011
Some checks failed
ci / validate-registry (push) Has been cancelled
Some checks failed
ci / validate-registry (push) Has been cancelled
SCOPE reflects 20 capabilities, production hub (A4), and current limits. Gap analysis closes historical MVP gaps and proposes priorities 18–23. Self-assessed product vector: D5 / A4 / C4 / R3.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
|
||||
**Repository:** `reuse-surface`
|
||||
**Artifact:** `docs/IntentScopeGapAnalysis.md`
|
||||
**Status:** Living analysis
|
||||
**Created:** 2026-06-15
|
||||
**Updated:** 2026-06-15
|
||||
**Purpose:** Record alignment, drift, and open gaps between declared intent and
|
||||
current delivered scope so future workplans can close them deliberately.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -13,19 +13,30 @@ current delivered scope so future workplans can close them deliberately.
|
||||
|
||||
`INTENT.md` describes the long-term capability registry product: a reuse surface
|
||||
that makes capabilities visible, assessable, and consumable across planning and
|
||||
implementation. `SCOPE.md` describes what the repository actually delivers today: an MVP registry
|
||||
with **A3 CLI tooling** (`validate`, `query`, `export`) atop Markdown-first
|
||||
authoring.
|
||||
implementation. `SCOPE.md` describes what the repository delivers today: an
|
||||
**active MVP** with **20 helix_forge capabilities**, **A3 CLI tooling**, a
|
||||
**hosted federation hub at A4** (`https://reuse.coulomb.social`), federation
|
||||
compose, catalog/graph UIs, pytest + CI gates, and Markdown-first authoring.
|
||||
|
||||
The two documents are **directionally aligned** on registry-first reuse, four
|
||||
maturity dimensions, and human/agent consumers. REUSE-WP-0003 through REUSE-WP-0010 closed the priority gaps from section 8.
|
||||
Remaining gaps are primarily document cross-coverage and operational polish:
|
||||
REUSE-WP-0001 through REUSE-WP-0011 closed the original MVP and federation
|
||||
roadmap. The documents are **directionally aligned** on registry-first reuse,
|
||||
four maturity dimensions, and human/agent consumers.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Document cross-coverage** — SCOPE still carries operational detail INTENT
|
||||
omits; INTENT success criteria are not fully enumerated in SCOPE.
|
||||
2. **Live federation sync** — on-demand HTTP fetch only; no polling or webhooks.
|
||||
**Remaining gaps** are no longer “build the registry” but **scale and harden**
|
||||
reuse across repos:
|
||||
|
||||
**Current reuse-surface vector (self-assessment):** `D5 / A3 / C4 / R3`
|
||||
1. **Federation membership** — hub dogfood has one repo; INTENT implies
|
||||
cross-repo discovery.
|
||||
2. **Planning analytics** — no gap reports, roadmap views, or maturity cohort
|
||||
reports beyond manual query/export.
|
||||
3. **Hub automation** — on-demand compose only; no `hub sync`, polling, or
|
||||
webhooks.
|
||||
4. **INTENT document drift** — `INTENT.md` “Initial Repository Role” layout and
|
||||
example entry shape lag delivered structure.
|
||||
5. **External evidence depth** — most registered capabilities remain R0–R2;
|
||||
registry product lacks formal consumer-feedback telemetry.
|
||||
|
||||
**Current reuse-surface product vector (self-assessment):** `D5 / A4 / C4 / R3`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -33,202 +44,149 @@ Remaining gaps are primarily document cross-coverage and operational polish:
|
||||
|
||||
| Topic | INTENT.md | SCOPE.md | Status |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Registry-first boundary | Unregistered capabilities are invisible | Same | Aligned |
|
||||
| Four maturity dimensions | D, A, C, R with separate internal/external evidence | Same model in use | Aligned |
|
||||
| Human and agent consumers | Registry formats for both | Markdown + YAML index | Aligned |
|
||||
| Reuse over inventory | Explicit principle | Implicit in workflows | Aligned |
|
||||
| Planning vs implementation reuse | Distinct dimensions | Reflected in query guidance | Aligned |
|
||||
| No internal code quality as maturity | Out of scope | Out of scope | Aligned |
|
||||
| No hosting registered capabilities | Implied | Explicit out of scope | Aligned |
|
||||
| Target maturity vectors | Expected per capability | Supported in entry schema | Aligned |
|
||||
| Broken expectations as evidence | Guiding principle | Supported in schema/entries | Aligned |
|
||||
| Technical foundation | "Eventually technical" | A0 only, no CLI/API | Gap |
|
||||
| Success criteria | Eight outcomes listed | Partially met, not enumerated | Gap |
|
||||
| Repository layout | `standards/`, `docs/`, JSON schema | `specs/`, `docs/` missing, YAML schema | Drift |
|
||||
| State Hub / workplans | Not mentioned | In scope and current state | SCOPE-only |
|
||||
| MVP acceptance criteria | Not mentioned | Claimed satisfied manually | SCOPE-only |
|
||||
| Domain scope | Cross-repo/product/org | helix_forge sample registry | Narrower delivery |
|
||||
| Registry-first boundary | Unregistered capabilities invisible | Same | Aligned |
|
||||
| Four maturity dimensions | D, A, C, R with separate internal/external evidence | Same model in entries and schema | Aligned |
|
||||
| Human and agent consumers | Registry formats for both | Markdown + YAML index + CLI + hub API | Aligned |
|
||||
| Reuse over inventory | Explicit principle | Workflows, overlaps, federation | Aligned |
|
||||
| Planning vs implementation reuse | Distinct dimensions | Query, vectors, consumption_modes | Aligned |
|
||||
| Technical foundation | “Eventually technical” | CLI A3, hub API A4, container A5 artifact | Aligned (MVP met) |
|
||||
| Implementation consumption modes | Discoverable modes per capability | Supported in schema and index | Aligned |
|
||||
| Cross-repo / org reuse | D7 generalized primitives | helix_forge domain; hub ready, thin membership | Partial |
|
||||
| Success criteria | Eight outcomes | Most met at MVP level; analytics weak | Partial |
|
||||
| Repository layout in INTENT | `standards/`, JSON schema, single yaml | `specs/`, YAML schema, per-entry MD | Drift |
|
||||
| State Hub / workplans | Not in INTENT | In scope; ADR-001 sync | SCOPE-only (OK) |
|
||||
| Hosting registered capabilities | Out of scope | Hub hosts metadata/URLs only | Aligned |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. INTENT → SCOPE Gaps
|
||||
## 3. INTENT → SCOPE Gaps (Open)
|
||||
|
||||
What INTENT declares that SCOPE does not yet deliver.
|
||||
What INTENT still expects beyond current SCOPE delivery.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.1 Technical foundation (High)
|
||||
### 3.1 Cross-repo federation breadth (High)
|
||||
|
||||
| INTENT claim | Current SCOPE reality | Gap |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| "Conceptual, structural, and **eventually technical** foundation" | Documentation-only repo, A0 availability | No CLI, validator, exporter, or API |
|
||||
| Implementation support through discoverable consumption modes | Manual index filtering only | No machine-assisted query or export |
|
||||
| Reference tooling | `tools/README.md` documents planned commands | Executable tools do not exist |
|
||||
| Capabilities reusable across repos, products, orgs | 20 entries, all `helix_forge` | No multi-domain federation yet |
|
||||
| Find capabilities before rebuilding (network scale) | Hub `/v1/federated` returns 12 capabilities from 1 repo | Sibling repos lack published indexes |
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** Implementation reuse still depends on humans/agents reading files.
|
||||
INTENT's "available enough to build with" mantra is only partially true for
|
||||
registry metadata itself.
|
||||
**Impact:** Hub infrastructure is live; **membership and index publishing** are
|
||||
the bottleneck, not registry tooling.
|
||||
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** Workplan for CLI validate/query/export (PRD section 17).
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** Register `state-hub` and other siblings when raw index
|
||||
URLs exist; document publish contract for domain repos.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.2 Planning support breadth (Medium)
|
||||
|
||||
| INTENT claim | Current SCOPE reality | Gap |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Planning support for prototype, MVP, enhancement, platform decisions | Manual compare/search guidance | No gap reports, roadmap views, or platformization filters |
|
||||
| Identify capability gaps, duplicates, overlaps, standardization candidates | Duplicate guidance only | No overlap detection, gap aggregation, or standardization workflow |
|
||||
| Track progress from named ideas to generalized capabilities | Promotion via front matter edits | No promotion history or changelog |
|
||||
| Plan prototype/MVP/enhancement/platform work | Manual compare via query/catalog | No gap reports or roadmap views |
|
||||
| Identify gaps, duplicates, overlaps, standardization | `overlaps` command (35 candidates on 20 entries) | No aggregation workflow or standardization tracker |
|
||||
| Track progress to generalized capabilities (D7) | `promotion_history` per entry | No cross-entry timeline or D7 pipeline view |
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** Planning reuse works for small registries; does not scale without
|
||||
tooling or disciplined manual process.
|
||||
**Impact:** Planning reuse works for small registries; portfolio-scale decisions
|
||||
still need disciplined manual process or new reports.
|
||||
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** Index views for "D5+/A0-A1" planning candidates and
|
||||
"D5+/A4+" implementation candidates; promotion history field or log.
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** Workplan for maturity cohort exports (`D5+/A0–A1`
|
||||
planning candidates, `D5+/A4+` implementation candidates).
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.3 Success criteria coverage (Medium)
|
||||
### 3.3 Hub operations and client sync (Medium)
|
||||
|
||||
INTENT success criteria vs current delivery:
|
||||
| INTENT claim | Current SCOPE reality | Gap |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Implementation support through consumption modes | Hub API + CLI for register/list/compose | No `hub sync` to local `sources.yaml` |
|
||||
| Operational reuse | Production hub on Railiance01 | No polling/webhooks; SQLite single-replica |
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** Agents on offline machines still maintain local federation manifests
|
||||
by hand unless they call the hub API directly.
|
||||
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** `reuse-surface hub sync`; optional Postgres / backup
|
||||
story if multi-replica is required.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.4 INTENT document drift (Low–Medium)
|
||||
|
||||
| INTENT section | Delivered reality | Gap |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| “Initial Repository Role” tree | Missing `reuse_surface/`, `Dockerfile`, hub specs, `workplans/archived/` | Stale onboarding map |
|
||||
| Example `external_evidence` uses `current:` | Schema uses `level:` per maturity standard | Authoring confusion |
|
||||
| Implies `docs/CapabilityAssessmentGuide.md` | Covered by `registry/README.md` + maturity standard | Missing dedicated guide |
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** Contributors reading INTENT first may look for paths that differ
|
||||
from operations. SCOPE layout is authoritative for delivery.
|
||||
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** Refresh INTENT layout section; align example YAML to
|
||||
schema field names.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.5 Consumer reliability evidence (Medium)
|
||||
|
||||
| INTENT claim | Current SCOPE reality | Gap |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Reliability from bugs, tickets, incidents, adoption | Schema supports evidence fields | Most entries R0–R2; thin `consumer_feedback` |
|
||||
| Registry product should be evidenced enough to trust | CI + 20 pytest tests + production hub smoke | No production telemetry or user feedback loop |
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** External evidence dimension is structurally present but lightly
|
||||
populated across the catalog.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Closed Gaps (Historical)
|
||||
|
||||
Previously high-severity gaps now delivered (REUSE-WP-0003 through WP-0011):
|
||||
|
||||
| Area | Delivery |
|
||||
|---|---|
|
||||
| Automated validation | `reuse-surface validate` + CI |
|
||||
| Query / export | `query`, `export` |
|
||||
| Catalog and overlaps | `catalog`, `overlaps`, searchable HTML |
|
||||
| Federation compose | Local + HTTP URL sources + cache |
|
||||
| Network federation | Remote fetch in compose |
|
||||
| Relation graphs | `graph`, Mermaid, HTML explorer |
|
||||
| Hosted hub | `reuse-surface serve`, `hub` CLI, `reuse.coulomb.social` |
|
||||
| Test suite | 20 pytest tests, fail-on-warnings in CI |
|
||||
| Concept docs | `docs/CapabilityRegistryConcept.md` |
|
||||
| Registry coverage | 20 capabilities (from 3 initial samples) |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Success Criteria vs Delivery
|
||||
|
||||
INTENT success criteria after WP-0011:
|
||||
|
||||
| Success criterion | Met today? | Notes |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Find reusable capabilities before rebuilding | Partial | Index + 3 samples; coverage is thin |
|
||||
| Compare maturity consistently | Yes | Vectors and schema enums |
|
||||
| Distinguish conceptual readiness from delivery | Yes | D vs A separation |
|
||||
| Distinguish internal assessment from external evidence | Yes | `maturity` vs `external_evidence` |
|
||||
| Plan prototype/MVP/enhancement/platform work | Partial | Guidance only, no reports |
|
||||
| Identify gaps, duplicates, overlaps, standardization candidates | Partial | Manual duplicate check only |
|
||||
| Track progress to generalized capabilities | No | No history or timeline |
|
||||
| Make reuse normal in product/architecture work | Partial | Agent instructions exist; tooling weak |
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.4 Expected repository layout (Low–Medium)
|
||||
|
||||
INTENT "Initial Repository Role" layout differs from delivered layout:
|
||||
|
||||
| INTENT path | Delivered path | Drift |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| `standards/CapabilityMaturityStandard.md` | `specs/CapabilityMaturityStandard.md` | Renamed directory |
|
||||
| `registry/capabilities.yaml` | `registry/capabilities/*.md` + `registry/indexes/capabilities.yaml` | Split canonical entries and index |
|
||||
| `registry/examples/` | `registry/capabilities/` (samples inline) | Different organization |
|
||||
| `schemas/capability.schema.json` | `schemas/capability.schema.yaml` | Format and location differ |
|
||||
| `docs/CapabilityRegistryConcept.md` | Missing | Not authored |
|
||||
| `docs/CapabilityAssessmentGuide.md` | Partially covered by `registry/README.md` | Concept guide missing |
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** New contributors reading INTENT first will look for paths that do
|
||||
not exist. SCOPE layout is authoritative for operations; INTENT layout is stale.
|
||||
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** Update INTENT "Initial Repository Role" to match
|
||||
delivered structure, or add redirect notes.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.5 Registry entry shape drift (Low)
|
||||
|
||||
INTENT example uses:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
external_evidence:
|
||||
completeness:
|
||||
current: C1
|
||||
reliability:
|
||||
current: R0
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Implemented schema and entries use `level` instead of `current` under
|
||||
`external_evidence`, matching `specs/CapabilityMaturityStandard.md` section 10.
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** Minor authoring confusion between INTENT and schema/template.
|
||||
|
||||
**Suggested follow-up:** Align INTENT example to `level` or document the alias.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3.6 Consumer reliability evidence (Medium)
|
||||
|
||||
INTENT requires reliability from bugs, tickets, incidents, ratings, adoption.
|
||||
SCOPE supports recording fields but:
|
||||
|
||||
- No sample entry has reliability above R0 except the feature-control example
|
||||
(R3 with thin evidence)
|
||||
- reuse-surface itself has **R0** — no consumer feedback loop for the registry
|
||||
|
||||
**Impact:** External evidence dimension is structurally present but weakly
|
||||
populated.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. SCOPE → INTENT Gaps
|
||||
|
||||
What SCOPE asserts that INTENT does not declare.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.1 Operational integration (Low)
|
||||
|
||||
SCOPE includes State Hub workplans, ADR-001 consistency sync, and session
|
||||
protocol. INTENT is product-conceptual and omits custodian workflow entirely.
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:** Not a product conflict. SCOPE correctly adds repository
|
||||
operations. INTENT may optionally reference workplan-driven evolution.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.2 MVP framing (Low)
|
||||
|
||||
SCOPE maps deliverables to `specs/ProductRequirementsDocument.md` sections 15–16
|
||||
and claims MVP acceptance criteria are met manually. INTENT does not define MVP
|
||||
boundaries or acceptance tests.
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:** SCOPE is more precise about current phase. INTENT remains the
|
||||
north star; SCOPE is the phase boundary.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.3 Domain anchoring (Low)
|
||||
|
||||
SCOPE inventories three **helix_forge** sample capabilities. INTENT describes
|
||||
cross-repo, product, and organizational reuse generically.
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:** Expected at MVP stage. INTENT target of D7 generalized primitives
|
||||
is not contradicted — sample scope is intentionally narrow.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4.4 Verification commands (Low)
|
||||
|
||||
SCOPE documents `rg --files`, `git diff --check`, and fix-consistency. INTENT
|
||||
has no verification or change-management guidance.
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:** SCOPE appropriately operationalizes delivery discipline.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Contradictions and Broken Expectations
|
||||
|
||||
Explicit mismatches a consumer might reasonably assume from reading both files:
|
||||
|
||||
| Expectation | Source | Reality | Severity |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| "Eventually technical foundation" is underway | INTENT scope section | No package, CLI, or API | Medium |
|
||||
| Maturity standard lives under `standards/` | INTENT layout | Lives under `specs/` | Low |
|
||||
| Single `capabilities.yaml` registry file | INTENT layout | Per-entry Markdown + separate index | Low |
|
||||
| JSON schema file exists | INTENT layout | YAML JSON Schema instead | Low |
|
||||
| Concept and assessment guides exist under `docs/` | INTENT layout | Only this gap analysis so far | Medium |
|
||||
| Registry can be searched by maturity automatically | INTENT success + SCOPE "possible now" | Manual index scan only | Medium |
|
||||
| Implementation reuse is supported | INTENT in-scope bullet | Only for entries with A2+ artifacts elsewhere | Medium |
|
||||
|
||||
No direct logical contradiction on registry-first boundary or maturity model
|
||||
separation was found.
|
||||
| Find reusable capabilities before rebuilding | **Yes (MVP)** | Index, query, catalog, hub `/v1/federated` |
|
||||
| Compare maturity consistently | **Yes** | Vectors, schema enums, graph relations |
|
||||
| Distinguish conceptual readiness from delivery | **Yes** | D vs A separation |
|
||||
| Distinguish internal assessment from external evidence | **Yes** | `maturity` vs `external_evidence` |
|
||||
| Plan prototype/MVP/enhancement/platform work | **Partial** | Guidance + manual tools; no reports |
|
||||
| Identify gaps, duplicates, overlaps, standardization | **Partial** | Overlaps command; no standardization workflow |
|
||||
| Track progress to generalized capabilities | **Partial** | Per-entry `promotion_history`; no D7 pipeline |
|
||||
| Make reuse normal in product/architecture work | **Partial** | AGENTS.md, hub live; federation membership thin |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Completeness Assessment (SCOPE vs INTENT)
|
||||
|
||||
Using INTENT's own completeness framing for the **reuse-surface product**:
|
||||
Using INTENT's completeness framing for the **reuse-surface product**:
|
||||
|
||||
| Area | INTENT expectation | Current SCOPE delivery | Level |
|
||||
| Area | INTENT expectation | Current delivery | Level |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Registry model and principles | Full | `INTENT.md` + `specs/` | C4 |
|
||||
| Registry model and principles | Full | INTENT + specs | C5 |
|
||||
| Maturity standard | Full | `specs/CapabilityMaturityStandard.md` | C5 |
|
||||
| Entry authoring | Full for MVP | Template + schema + README | C4 |
|
||||
| Sample registry | Examples expected | 3 helix_forge entries | C3 |
|
||||
| Discovery surface | Machine-readable | YAML index | C3 |
|
||||
| Validation | Implied tooling | Manual checklist | C2 |
|
||||
| Search/filter | Supported | Documented manual patterns | C2 |
|
||||
| Agent instructions | Expected | `AGENTS.md` registry section | C4 |
|
||||
| Technical consumption of registry | A3+ target natural for tools | A0 | C1 |
|
||||
| Consumer evidence for registry itself | Should be recorded | None (R0) | C1 |
|
||||
| Planning reports and gap analytics | Success criteria | Not present | C1 |
|
||||
| Documentation canon | Concept + assessment guides | Partial | C2 |
|
||||
| Entry authoring | Full for MVP | Template + schema + README | C5 |
|
||||
| Sample / seed registry | Examples | 20 helix_forge entries | C4 |
|
||||
| Discovery surface | Machine-readable | Index, query, export, hub API | C5 |
|
||||
| Validation | Tooling | `validate` + CI | C5 |
|
||||
| Search / filter | Supported | query, catalog HTML | C4 |
|
||||
| Federation | Cross-repo | Compose + production hub; 1 member | C3 |
|
||||
| Agent instructions | Expected | AGENTS.md + tools README | C4 |
|
||||
| Technical consumption | A3+ for tools | CLI A3, hub A4 | C4 |
|
||||
| Planning analytics | Success criteria | Not present | C2 |
|
||||
| Documentation canon | Concept + assessment | Concept doc; assessment via README | C4 |
|
||||
|
||||
**Overall completeness vs INTENT:** **C3 (Functional Core)** — the central
|
||||
registry MVP works manually, but variants, tooling, evidence, and conceptual
|
||||
docs remain incomplete.
|
||||
**Overall completeness vs INTENT:** **C4 (Broadly Covered)** — core registry,
|
||||
tooling, and hub work; federation membership and planning analytics remain
|
||||
bounded gaps.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -236,60 +194,42 @@ docs remain incomplete.
|
||||
|
||||
| Signal | State |
|
||||
|---|---|
|
||||
| Automated tests | `tests/` — pytest covers validate, query, export, overlaps, federation, graph, catalog |
|
||||
| Schema validation in CI | `.gitea/workflows/ci.yml` — validate, federation, catalog, graph, pytest |
|
||||
| Consumer feedback on registry workflows | None |
|
||||
| Production or repeated agent usage evidence | None |
|
||||
| Known friction | Manual index maintenance; schema/INTENT field naming drift |
|
||||
| Automated tests | 20 pytest tests (registry, federation, hub) |
|
||||
| Schema validation in CI | validate, federation, catalog, graph, pytest |
|
||||
| Production hub | `reuse.coulomb.social` — TLS, health, dogfood registration |
|
||||
| Consumer feedback on registry workflows | None formal |
|
||||
| Known friction | Sibling index publishing; INTENT layout drift; hub single-replica SQLite |
|
||||
|
||||
**Overall reliability vs INTENT consumer-evidence framing:** **R3 (Proven in
|
||||
Development)** for registry CLI tooling — pytest suite and CI gates exercise
|
||||
core commands. Individual registered capabilities may carry their own evidence
|
||||
(e.g. feature-control at R3).
|
||||
**Overall reliability vs INTENT consumer-evidence framing:** **R3 (Usable)** —
|
||||
CI and production smoke support normal agent/operator workflows with known
|
||||
limitations. Not yet **R4 Dependable** without SLO, backup, and feedback data.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 8. Priority Gap Closure Order
|
||||
|
||||
| Priority | Gap | Outcome | Status |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| 1 | INTENT layout stale | INTENT layout aligned to delivered structure | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
| 2 | No automated validation | `reuse-surface validate` | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
| 3 | Thin registry coverage | Six helix_forge entries | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
| 4 | Missing concept docs | `docs/CapabilityRegistryConcept.md` | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
| 5 | No promotion history | `promotion_history` in schema/template | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
| 6 | Search/filter manual only | `reuse-surface query` | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
| 7 | No registry export | `reuse-surface export` | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
| 8 | Self-reliability evidence | `capability.registry.register` at R2; friction recorded | Closed (WP-0003) |
|
||||
### Closed (WP-0001 – WP-0011)
|
||||
|
||||
### Next recommended work
|
||||
|
||||
| Priority | Gap | Outcome | Status |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| 9 | Catalog site | `reuse-surface catalog` → MD + HTML | Closed (WP-0004) |
|
||||
| 10 | Overlap detection | `reuse-surface overlaps` | Closed (WP-0004) |
|
||||
| 11 | CI validation | `.gitea/workflows/ci.yml` | Closed (WP-0004) |
|
||||
| 12 | Registry federation | `federation compose` + federated index | Closed (WP-0005) |
|
||||
| 14 | Graph visualization | `reuse-surface graph` Mermaid output | Closed (WP-0005) |
|
||||
|
||||
| Priority | Gap | Outcome | Status |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| 13 | Interactive catalog | `docs/catalog/search.html` + `registry.json` | Closed (WP-0007) |
|
||||
| 15 | Network federation | HTTP URL sources + cache in `federation compose` | Closed (WP-0010) |
|
||||
| 16 | Graph UI | `docs/graph/index.html` explorer | Closed (WP-0008) |
|
||||
Priorities 1–17 from the original roadmap are **closed**. See section 4 and
|
||||
archived workplans under `workplans/archived/`.
|
||||
|
||||
### Proposed next work
|
||||
|
||||
| Priority | Gap | Suggested outcome | Status |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| 17 | Hosted federation hub | Hub service on `railiance01` + `reuse-surface hub` CLI | Closed (WP-0011) |
|
||||
| 18 | Sibling hub registrations | `state-hub` + one other repo on hub | Open |
|
||||
| 19 | `hub sync` | Write `sources.yaml` from hub state | Open |
|
||||
| 20 | Planning cohort reports | Export/filter views for D5+/A4+ candidates | Open |
|
||||
| 21 | INTENT layout sync | Update INTENT.md tree and example entry shape | Open |
|
||||
| 22 | Hub hardening | Postgres option, backup, documented SLO (A5→A6 path) | Open |
|
||||
| 23 | External evidence program | Raise catalog R levels with consumer_feedback | Open |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 9. Document Maintenance Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- Re-run this analysis when either `INTENT.md` or `SCOPE.md` changes materially.
|
||||
- When a gap closes, update section 3–5 and adjust the self-assessment vector.
|
||||
- When a gap closes, update sections 3–8 and adjust the self-assessment vector.
|
||||
- New workplans that close gaps should reference the relevant row in section 8.
|
||||
- Prefer updating `SCOPE.md` for delivery truth and `INTENT.md` for product
|
||||
truth; use this file to track delta between them.
|
||||
@@ -301,13 +241,10 @@ core commands. Individual registered capabilities may carry their own evidence
|
||||
| Date | Change |
|
||||
|---|---|
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | Initial analysis after REUSE-WP-0002 completion |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0003 closed priority gaps 1–8; vector updated to D5/A3/C4/R2 |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0004 closed priorities 9–11 (catalog, overlaps, CI) |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0005 closed priorities 12 and 14 (federation, relation graphs) |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0006 expanded registry to 12 capabilities; relation hygiene clean |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0007 closed priority 13 (searchable catalog UI) |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0008 closed priority 16 (graph explorer) |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0009 added pytest suite and CI fail-on-warnings; vector R3 |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0010 closed priority 15 (HTTP remote federation + cache) |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0011 proposed for priority 17 (hosted hub on railiance01) |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0011 closed priority 17; hub live at reuse.coulomb.social (TLS pending DNS) |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0003 closed priorities 1–8; vector D5/A3/C4/R2 |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0004 closed priorities 9–11 |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0005 closed priorities 12 and 14 |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0006 expanded registry to 12 capabilities |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0007–0010 closed catalog UI, graph UI, pytest, network federation |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | REUSE-WP-0011 closed priority 17; hub live at reuse.coulomb.social |
|
||||
| 2026-06-15 | Post-WP-0011 refresh: 20 capabilities, vector D5/A4/C4/R3, priorities 18–23 proposed |
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user