title: "Map — "What was done?"" source: "tasks/TFW-60__conflict_resistant_shared_workspace/phase-aa/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 AA TS: TS Phase AA at revision 3 ONB: ONB Phase AA — eight blocking questions, all answered Master HL at contract baseline: 2123de1 (after amendment A4)

Understanding¶

The framework could not deliver its own tooling. gen_index.py and migrate_board.py lived in docs/scripts/, which /tfw-update does not copy, so a receiving project was told by conventions.md and the CHANGELOG to run files it did not have — and the tools resolved the project root as parents[2], which made their location load-bearing. Phase AA moves the four scripts into .tfw/scripts/ with git mv, replaces depth arithmetic with a marker search, and writes .tfw/migrations/2.0.0.md — the one new file — as a procedure for a project that is not this repository.

Around that move, ten field-report findings close: the board's location and heading become inputs on the same code path that made a committed revision the default source; a directory whose name the identifier grammar rejects is reported as unresolved instead of being called a backlog idea; the carrier validator names the key it rejected instead of printing ScannerError; update.md gains the pristine-tag diff, the task_containers decision and a team/ creation step; three adapter sources stop routing /tfw-research at a file that has never existed. Under owner revision R3 the phase subtracts: two files the coordinator had proposed are withdrawn before creation, three templates leave the flat namespace for directories mirroring their output, and --check / --validate / --doctor collapse into one flag with three subjects, deleting the five-line config comment that existed only because the names failed.

Three commits carry the work (f14f744, 80c2ed5, 1079020); a fourth (440d6fd) strengthened the AC-3 evidence after the RF was filed. The phase's declared outcome — an external project completing the update from the payload alone — is reported unmet on its acceptance half and handed back to the owner, exactly as the ONB Q1 ruling and TS §7 require.

TS ↔ RF Alignment¶

TS requirement	RF claim	Aligned?
AC-1 — tooling ships inside the payload; root by marker, not depth	§3 ✅, E1–E5; depth test run at three placements inside a real fixture	✅
AC-2 — a major release ships a migration guide, routed from `update.md` Step 3	§3 ✅, E6–E10	✅
AC-3 — migration finds a board wherever the project keeps it; parser untouched	§3 ✅, E11–E13	✅
AC-4 — an unmatched directory is reported, never described	§3 ✅, E14–E18, on the corpus that produced the finding	✅
AC-5 — a person can hand-author the carrier correctly	§3 ✅, E19–E22	⚠️ partial — see verify.md V4
AC-6 — `task_containers` presented as a decision; `initial_seq` named for removal	§3 ✅, E23–E24	✅
AC-7 — `team/` delivered, not assumed; no README template	§3 ✅, E25–E27	✅
AC-8 — migration reads a stable input; refuses rather than falling back	§3 ✅, E28–E32	✅
AC-9 — one flag, three subjects; reports and exits	§3 ✅, E33–E38	✅
AC-10 — the pristine-tag diff, and whose tag it is	§3 ✅, E39–E41	✅
AC-11 — shipped instructions name files that exist	§3 ✅, E42–E44	✅
AC-12 — the session name carries the task once it exists	§3 ✅, E45–E46	✅
AC-13 half one — development fixture	§3 ✅, E47–E50	✅
AC-13 half two — acceptance evidence	§3 ❌ UNMET, E51 DEFERRED, handed back to the owner	✅ — reported exactly as TS §7 requires
AC-14 — the release describes what shipped	§3 ✅, E52–E57	⚠️ partial — see verify.md V4

Deviations from TS¶

Four, all raised in census.md before acting rather than discovered afterwards:

Deviation	RF's account	Reviewer's read
`docs/mkdocs.yml` listed in TS §4, not changed	`gen-files` runs `scripts/gen_docs.py` relative to `docs/`; the move does not reach it. Modify becomes 25, not 26	Correct. The census had already flagged it conditionally: "modified only if the build requires it"
Three `.agents/skills/` entries listed, not changed	Codex skills route by path and copy no workflow content; all 11 byte-identical	Verified independently — 11/11 identical
Four files modified that TS §4 does not enumerate — `.tfw/workflows/knowledge.md` + its two copies, and `team/README.md`	All four are reached only through R3's own template moves; raised under the return-to-coordinator rule and proceeded because no limit was crossed	Correct handling. The group is a consequence of a decision taken two hours before the census, not a discovery
`.tfw/templates/project_config.yaml` changed beyond a path reference — `build.verify` became a real command	A receiving project can run it from the moment the payload lands	In scope: AC-9's third bullet makes `build.verify` the `--check tasks` gate, and a placeholder there would have shipped the AC unmet

TS items not addressed in RF: none. Every AC is answered, including the one answered UNMET.

Checkpoint¶

Self-check: - [x] Read RF §1-§5 completely? - [x] Read TS DoD and matched each item to RF §3? — all 15 AC rows, above - [x] Read HL §7 Principles — can I state the design philosophy? — pain before mechanism; task locality; one normal writer; stable paths; local truth with derived views; filesystem first with Git preserved; the coordinator logs management; consolidation is a boundary; no trace deletion during simplification; every phase pays for its release surface. Phase AA is principle 10 made concrete: the phase that exists because a release surface went unpaid. - [x] Read ONB — were blocking questions resolved? — eight questions, all answered; Q6's answer explicitly superseded at TS R3 and the ONB says so in place, which is why the RF implements --check {index,tasks,project} rather than --doctor

Stage complete: YES