Skip to content

title: "Map — "What was done?"" source: "tasks/TFW-60__conflict_resistant_shared_workspace/phase-a/review/map.md"

Map — "What was done?"

Mindset: Experienced newcomer. You arrived after someone else's work. Understand before you judge. No opinions yet — only comprehension. Test: "Can I explain what was done to someone who hasn't read the RF?" RF: RF Phase A TS: TS Phase A

Understanding

Phase A replaced the root README Task Board as live task authority with task-local status.md files, immutable one-file-per-event journals, declared participant profiles, and a persisted but non-authoritative generated portfolio index. It also introduced clock-derived task identifiers, deterministic index and migration utilities, legacy-corpus compatibility, lifecycle/workflow and adapter propagation, and the 2.0.0 release surface. The executor reports 45 modified originals and 28 new shipped files, plus resynchronized byte copies, with transport-specific behavior and non-specialist observation explicitly deferred to TFW-61.

TS ↔ RF Alignment

TS requirement RF claim Aligned?
AC-1 — configured container, creation-year nesting, stable paths task_containers is an ordered list; fixture lifecycle and year-change cases leave paths unchanged ✅
AC-2 — clock identifiers without project-wide allocation YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS, identifier-level collision detection, bounded retry, shared legacy/new resolver ✅
AC-3 — immutable one-file-per-event journal with measured ceiling Closed event vocabulary, concurrent append fixture, correction-as-new-event, 120-code-point measured ceiling ✅
AC-4 — declared participants and bounded session resolution team/ profiles, private binding outside the tree, four resolution cases; non-specialist readability stated as unobserved intent ✅
AC-5 — deterministic derived index that never outranks task state Generated workspace/00-INDEX.md, explicit sorting/freshness/source count, degraded-state fixtures, task re-read rule ✅
AC-6 — exact lossless legacy migration Snapshot of all 61 rows, 11 migrated state files, 53/8/0 reconciliation claimed, no legacy modifications claimed ✅
AC-7 — references and history keep resolving Broken-link failure set claimed to shrink 82 → 64; legacy task paths and commit-subject resolution retained ✅
AC-8 — live board removed and no remaining consumer reads it Root route replaces table; board parser removed; integration tests rewritten to fail on reintroduction ✅
AC-9 — no runtime required to read or advance a task State and event mutations remain ordinary file writes; executable code limited to docs/index/migration ✅
AC-10 — release surface describes the shipped model Version/config at 2.0.0, changelog and migration guidance updated, adapter originals propagated, debt registry updates handed off ✅

Deviations from TS

  • The delivered new-file count is 28 rather than the ruled 23. The five additional files are TFW-60's own journal events; the RF argues that they are part of the already-declared journal deliverable and that the explicit stop threshold of roughly 75 total files was not crossed (73 delivered).
  • team/claude-code.md was added because real journal entries use actor: claude-code; AC-4 requires an automated principal to have its own profile.
  • .tfw/workflows/update.md was left untouched, while .tfw/quickstart.md was modified. The RF presents this as a one-for-one correction within already-declared groups, leaving 45 modified originals.
  • AC-4's non-specialist readability observation is not completed. This matches the TS instruction to state it as unobserved design intent and route the real observation to TFW-61 rather than claim coverage.
  • The RF reports an execution-process failure: broad staging temporarily swept TFW-54 and TFW-55 work into a TFW-60 commit; a later commit removed those paths from the index while leaving the other tasks' working-tree files untouched.

Checkpoint

Self-check: - [x] Read RF §1-§5 completely? - [x] Read TS DoD and matched each item to RF §3? - [x] Read HL §7 Principles — can I state the design philosophy? - [x] Read ONB — were blocking questions resolved?

Stage complete: YES