Vuong Hoang
d37b81ab9f
The two dated log sections had never been split, so every one of their 29 entries sat inline and the startup index had grown to 372 lines — which is the cost the two-tier scheme exists to remove, paid on every session that reads the file. 27 entries were over threshold. All 29 now have a detail file under persistent-memory.d/ and a one-line index entry that routes rather than restates. Index: 372 -> 93 lines. No archival. The soft cap fired, but every entry in this repo is dated 2026-09-21 or later, so the under-14-days guard held all of them back — and the split alone took the index well under the target without moving anything out of the active file. The in-flight section is rewritten for the post-release state: nothing is in flight, no gate is outstanding, and the next unit is explicitly recorded as the operator's undecided call rather than as a plan. The session's recommendation (U4, on three grounds) is written down so it does not have to be re-derived, alongside the two alternatives and why they are alternatives. Two dated predictions are carried forward with their dates and their instruments: the U5 adoption re-measure on 2026-09-29, which already reads 3 of 24 announced and 2 with a why from peers told nothing, and the .forever re-count a fortnight AFTER U4 lands, which is U4's own success criterion and is destroyed by running it early.
657 B
657 B
Tagging a release while a review gate was in flight
2026-09-21 · booth
Tagging a release while a review gate was still in flight.
v0.2.0 was cut and announced to 15 consuming handles; the
/heid-contract-review panel — dispatched BEFORE implementation, as the
discipline says — replied afterwards with three defects in the code that had just
shipped, one of them silent data loss. Nothing about the tier decision was wrong;
the timing was. If a gate is outstanding on the work being released, the tag
waits for it. The cost was a same-hour v0.2.1 and a correction note to peers
who had already verified against the broken version.