docs(canon): add ADR-001 — workplans are repository artefacts

State-hub is a read/cache layer. Workplans and work items must
originate as Markdown files in their native repository so the hub
can rebuild its full representation from registered repos alone
(the rebuild principle).

Establishes:
- canon/architecture/ directory for ADRs
- Workplan file convention (frontmatter schema, task embedding)
- Rebuild sequence (migrate → seed-domains → sync-workplans)
- Marks DB-first v0.3/v0.5 records as legacy pending sync tooling

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-02-28 11:45:42 +01:00
parent 6f468baa35
commit 3332d2de2f

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,183 @@
---
id: ADR-001
type: architecture-decision-record
title: "Workplans and Work Items Are Repository Artefacts"
status: accepted
decided_by: Bernd Worsch
date: "2026-02-28"
tags: ["architecture", "state-hub", "workplans", "source-of-truth", "rebuild-principle"]
---
# ADR-001: Workplans and Work Items Are Repository Artefacts
## Status
Accepted.
## Context
During early State Hub development (v0.1v0.4), workstreams and tasks were
created directly in the PostgreSQL database via MCP bootstrap tools
(`create_workstream`, `create_task`). This made the database the **origin** of
work items — not a cache or index. The pattern was convenient for rapid
bootstrapping but is architecturally wrong for a system built on the values of
auditability, reversibility, and local-first sovereignty.
The trigger for formalising this decision was the creation of the v0.5
workplan ("Dynamic Domains & Multi-Repo") directly in the state-hub database
without a corresponding file artefact in any repository.
## Decision
**Workplans and work items MUST originate as Markdown files in the repository
that owns them.** The Custodian State Hub indexes and caches those artefacts
but is never their origin.
Formally: the state-hub must (theoretically, given sufficient compute and
time) be able to **rebuild its full representation** of repositories, their
workplans, tasks, decisions, and dependencies by reading only the files in the
registered repositories. No information that matters for coordination should
exist solely in the database.
### Corollaries
1. **Repository is authoritative.** A workplan file is the canonical record.
The state-hub database row is a materialized cache of that file.
2. **Database is disposable.** Dropping and re-creating the database from
registered repository files must produce an equivalent state. The database
is an operational convenience, not a primary store.
3. **MCP bootstrap tools become index/sync tools.** `create_workstream` and
`create_task` are acceptable as convenience wrappers only if they write the
file first and then register the row. Using them to write DB-only records
violates this ADR.
4. **The rebuild principle implies a sync mechanism.** There must be a defined
path (`make sync-workplans` or equivalent) by which the state-hub reads
workplan files from registered repositories and upserts its database state.
## Workplan File Convention
Each workplan lives in a `workplans/` directory in the repository that owns
the work. The owning repository is identified by domain.
### Location
```
<repo-root>/workplans/<id>-<slug>.md
```
Examples:
- `the-custodian/workplans/CUST-WP-0005-dynamic-domains.md`
- `railiance/workplans/RAIL-WP-0001-three-phoenix.md`
### Frontmatter Schema
```yaml
---
id: CUST-WP-0005 # human-readable workplan ID, unique per repo
type: workplan
title: "State Hub v0.5 — Dynamic Domains & Multi-Repo"
domain: custodian # must match a registered domain slug
status: active # active | completed | archived
owner: custodian
topic_slug: custodian # maps to a state-hub Topic slug
created: "2026-02-28"
updated: "2026-02-28"
---
```
### Task Items
Tasks are embedded in the workplan file as headed sections. Each task
section carries its own YAML block:
```markdown
## P1.1 — Create `domains` table + Alembic migration
```task
id: CUST-WP-0005-T001
status: todo
priority: high
```
Task description prose here.
```
The state-hub parses these embedded task blocks during ingestion and upserts
rows in the `tasks` table. The `id` field is the stable external key; the
state-hub UUID is internal and opaque.
### Decision Items
Decisions are separate files or embedded sections following the same pattern,
using `type: decision` in frontmatter.
## Rebuild Principle
The rebuild sequence for a clean state-hub:
1. `make migrate` — create schema
2. `make seed-domains` — insert domain rows (domains.yaml in canon/)
3. For each registered repository: `make sync-workplans REPO=<slug>` — parse
workplan files and upsert workstreams, tasks, decisions
4. `make sync-progress` — replay progress events from episodic memory logs
After step 4 the database must be functionally equivalent to the live state.
## Consequences
### Immediate
- The v0.5 and v0.3 workplans created DB-first in this session are **legacy
records** that violate this ADR. Remediation: write the corresponding
workplan files, then mark the DB rows as `source: db-legacy` until a sync
mechanism can reconcile them.
- The state-hub CLAUDE.md design-boundary note must be updated: the MCP
bootstrap tools are permitted only as write-through tools (file + DB), never
as DB-only tools.
### Medium Term
- A `make sync-workplans` command must be implemented as part of the
managed-repos / contribution-tracking infrastructure (see v0.3 workplan).
- The `managed_repos` table is the prerequisite: the state-hub must know which
repositories to scan.
- Workplan file format must be versioned and parsed by a dedicated loader
(`state-hub/scripts/sync_workplans.py`).
### Long Term
- When the state-hub grows to cover multiple users or teams, this principle
ensures that no coordination state can be lost by a database failure.
Every repository is its own resilient shard of the coordination graph.
- This is the foundation for the "transgenerational" property: workplans in
git survive database migrations, cloud provider changes, and system
rebuilds.
## Alternatives Considered
**Database-first with export:** Create in DB, export to files on demand.
Rejected: export is easily skipped and files become secondary/stale.
**Files-only, no database:** Parse files on every query.
Rejected: impractical at scale; the database is a necessary cache for
cross-repo aggregation and real-time dashboard queries.
**Hybrid with explicit sync flag:** Mark some records as "db-authoritative"
and others as "file-authoritative."
Rejected: introduces ambiguity about which records matter; violates the
"single source of truth" principle.
## Related
- Custodian Constitution v0.1 §2 (Powers) — canon changes require review gate
- ADR-000 (forthcoming) — overall Custodian architecture principles
- State Hub v0.3 workplan — `sync_workplans.py` is a Phase 4 deliverable
- `canon/values/foundational_values_v0.1.md` — Local-first, Auditability,
Reversibility