Conversation
Two direction documents and a map, none of which existed. Nine analysis and record documents had accumulated; nothing said what we are building, for whom, or in what order. **goals.md** -- who it is for, eight goals, what done looks like, Year 3 specifically, non-goals. Written to be readable by the External Advisory Board and to be the thing the Year 3 report is checked against. Every goal traces to a tracker row, and where a Year 2 forward commitment exists it is quoted verbatim; all ten quotes were verified as substrings of the RPPR files. Shaped by four answers from the user: the primary user is a collaborating project installing the toolkit; production quality means reliability, then installability, then reproducibility, then breadth, each a precondition for the next; composites run registered simulators only this year, stated as an access-control boundary rather than an isolation one; and the two hosted backends should converge. **strategy.md** -- the four-layer model, four decisions, sequencing and risks. Decision 1 consolidates the toolchain. The evidence: the service uses 17% of pbest (188 of 1,096 lines, five symbols, set closed), and the other 83% is the local-or-remote CLI that is the product. The service executes composites on process-bigraph 1.0.5 while the ecosystem runs 1.8.4, thirty-seven releases and 251 days behind, because the exact pin on pbest transitively freezes the engine. The workbench ecosystem depends on the foundation directly and on pbest not at all. bsander and bsew were the previous generation of the same pipeline, superseded in February 2026. The lineage is stated plainly and the contributions acknowledged: the earlier pair established the split that is still right; pbest added the local-or-remote duality that must survive. Attribution is a section, not a sentence: merge with git subtree so blame keeps naming authors, note that CITATION.cff already credits both, archive rather than delete, and add a lineage document. Archive pbest last and only after a release ships from the new home. Decision 2 makes identity a digest and sequences it before breadth. Decision 3 records the trusted-tier scope with its trigger for change. Decision 4 names convergence with viva-api as a goal and gives read-only first steps; that repository is not touched. The plan phases include one that did not exist before the 17% measurement: put the local execution path under test before upgrading the engine, because the upgrade lands almost entirely in code the service never runs and pbest's own suite barely covers. **index.md** becomes a map: one row per document, what question it answers, whether it is direction, analysis or record, and when it was last measured. Checked against the Year 1 and Year 2 reports and the advisory board report: the three libraries are named in neither, the reported product is the Compose API and the engine, so consolidating retracts nothing anyone was told. The board's praise for a sibling tool's low maintenance burden is the argument for this work, made in their words. One trap recorded: both reports count repositories as output, and this work archives three. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_018TgVbCXXWAWhNjtKTzrxvN
These are internal planning, analysis and grant documents, not user-facing documentation. mkdocs builds every file under docs/ unless told otherwise, and `on-release-main.yml` runs `gh-deploy`, so the next release would have published all of it: goals, strategy, the testing and runtime plans, the ecosystem survey, the CIP review and the grant tracker. A local deploy would also have swept up the git-ignored grant text. `exclude_docs` in mkdocs.yml now lists them. Verified by building the site and listing its pages: only `index.html` and `modules/index.html` remain. The document map moved from index.md, which is the public landing page, to docs/README.md, which GitHub renders when browsing the folder and the site excludes. index.md is restored to what it was. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_018TgVbCXXWAWhNjtKTzrxvN
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Two direction documents and a map, none of which existed. Nine analysis and record documents had accumulated; nothing said what we are building, for whom, or in what order. Documentation only; no code changes.
docs/goals.mdWho it is for, eight goals, what done looks like, Year 3 specifically, and non-goals stated outright. Written to be readable by the External Advisory Board and to be the document the Year 3 report is checked against.
Every goal traces to a tracker row. Where a Year 2 forward commitment exists it is quoted verbatim, and all ten quotes were verified as substrings of the RPPR files with whitespace normalised.
Shaped by four answers given in review:
docs/strategy.mdThe four-layer model, four decisions, sequencing and risks.
Decision 1 consolidates the toolchain. The evidence, all measured: the service uses 17% of pbest (188 of 1,096 lines, five symbols, closed set), and the other 83% is the local-or-remote CLI that is the product. The service executes composites on process-bigraph 1.0.5 while the ecosystem runs 1.8.4, thirty-seven releases and 251 days behind, because the exact pin on pbest transitively freezes the engine. The workbench ecosystem depends on the foundation directly and on pbest not at all.
bsanderandbsewwere the previous generation of the same pipeline, superseded in February 2026.The lineage is stated plainly and the contributions acknowledged. Attribution is a section rather than a sentence: merge with
git subtreeso blame keeps naming authors, note thatCITATION.cffalready credits both, archive rather than delete, add a lineage document, and archive pbest last, only after a release ships from its new home.The phases include one that did not exist before the 17% measurement: put the local execution path under test before upgrading the engine, because the upgrade lands almost entirely in code the service never runs and pbest's own suite barely covers.
Decision 2 makes identity a digest and sequences it before breadth. Decision 3 records the trusted-tier scope with its trigger for change. Decision 4 names convergence with
viva-apias a goal and gives read-only first steps. That repository is invivarium-collectiveand was not touched.docs/README.md, and keeping all of this off the public siteThe document map lives in
docs/README.md, which GitHub renders when browsing the folder.index.md, the public landing page, is restored to what it was.These documents are internal and are not published. mkdocs builds every file under
docs/unless told otherwise, and the release workflow runsgh-deploy, so without a change the next release would have published the goals, the strategy, both plans, the ecosystem survey, the CIP review and the grant tracker.exclude_docsinmkdocs.ymlnow lists them. Verified by building the site and listing its pages: onlyindex.htmlandmodules/index.htmlremain.What the reports say
Checked against Year 1, Year 2 and the advisory board report. The three libraries are named in neither report, nor to the board. The reported product is the Compose API and the engine, so consolidating retracts nothing anyone was told. Year 2 claimed the Compose-API kernel marks the standard's transition "from design to operational use", which the engine lag undercuts, making the upgrade a reporting obligation. The board's praise for a sibling tool's low maintenance burden is the argument for this work, quoted in their words.
One trap recorded for the Year 3 report: both prior reports count repositories as output, and this work archives three.
Verification
mkdocs build -sclean; both documents linked from the index.make checkclean.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_018TgVbCXXWAWhNjtKTzrxvN