docs(gaps): renumber GT-633 → GT-640, the collision the new guard found - #301
Merged
Conversation
`49-validate-gap-id-allocation` reported on its first real run that `GT-633` names
two different gaps: on develop it is "`evolith init` scaffolds a repository that
cannot pass its own governance on the first run" (`c8270e48`, 2026-07-29), on main
it is the tautological-guard row (`c3221276`, 2026-07-30). Per the guard's own
advice the NEWER row moves, and that is mine.
THIS COMMIT IS THE COST GT-638 DESCRIBES, paid once so it is on the record. The id
had to be changed in:
- the board row and its anchor, EN and ES
- the catalog heading, EN and ES
- the closure-evidence record
- cross-references from GT-638 and GT-639, EN and ES, including the narrative
that describes this very collision — updated to say how it was resolved rather
than left describing a state that no longer exists
- three source comments (`capture-native-evaluability-snapshot.mjs`,
`test/rule-corpus-triage.ts`, `rule-corpus-triage.spec.ts`)
and it CANNOT be changed in the commit messages and PR bodies that already name
GT-633 — #294 through #300 among them. That is the lossy half, and it is why the
row asks for allocation to be right the first time rather than repairable.
Historical mentions are kept and marked ("registered as GT-633 at the time")
rather than rewritten, so the record still reads correctly against those commits.
VERIFIED THE COLLISION IS GONE, not assumed: `49-validate-gap-id-allocation
--base origin/develop` now reports 0 collisions and lists GT-640 among the newly
allocated ids, where before it named GT-633 on both sides. Also 08-validate-
tracking, 01-validate-docs (1491 files), 04 bilingual parity, core-domain
rule-corpus-triage 22/22, iso-5055-mapping guard 9/9, 46 chain at a fixed point.
NOT DONE HERE: develop carries the same three source comments, and after this
lands they will name GT-640 on main and GT-633 on develop — where GT-633 is the
scaffolding gap. Whoever resolves the develop -> main merge should take main's
version of those files; noted on #284.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
📊 Bilingual Coverage ImpactPR Changes
Repository Coverage
✅ Good: All EN changes have ES counterparts. Generated by GitHub Actions |
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
1 participant
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.
49-validate-gap-id-allocationreported on its first real run thatGT-633names two different gaps:developevolith initscaffolds a repository that cannot pass its own governance on the first run"c8270e48, 2026-07-29mainc3221276, 2026-07-30Per the guard's own advice the newer row moves, and that is mine.
This commit is the cost GT-638 describes, paid once so it is on the record
The id had to be changed in the board row and its anchor (EN + ES), the catalog heading (EN + ES), the closure-evidence record, cross-references from GT-638 and GT-639 in both languages — including the narrative that describes this very collision, updated to say how it was resolved rather than left describing a state that no longer exists — and three source comments.
And it cannot be changed in the commit messages and PR bodies that already name GT-633: #294 through #300 among them. That is the lossy half, and it is why the row asks for allocation to be right the first time rather than repairable.
Historical mentions are kept and marked ("registered as GT-633 at the time") rather than rewritten, so the record still reads correctly against those commits.
Verified the collision is gone, not assumed
49-validate-gap-id-allocation --base origin/developnow reports 0 collisions and listsGT-640among the newly allocated ids — where before it named GT-633 on both sides.Also:
08-validate-tracking·01-validate-docs(1491 files) ·04-check-bilingual-parity· core-domainrule-corpus-triage22/22 ·iso-5055-mappingguard 9/9 ·46chain at a fixed point.Not done here
developcarries the same three source comments. After this lands they nameGT-640on main andGT-633on develop — where GT-633 is the scaffolding gap. Whoever resolvesdevelop→mainshould take main's version of those files; noted on #284.Evolith Core Quality Gates
01-validate-docs.mjsgreen — it would have caught a dangling#gt-633anchor.04-check-bilingual-parity.mjsgreen.Linked ADRs / Issues
Conventional Commits
🤖 Generated with Claude Code