Skip to content

docs: activate universal repository task ledger#1105

Closed
BigSimmo wants to merge 12 commits into
mainfrom
codex/shared-task-ledger-c7306a
Closed

docs: activate universal repository task ledger#1105
BigSimmo wants to merge 12 commits into
mainfrom
codex/shared-task-ledger-c7306a

Conversation

@BigSimmo

@BigSimmo BigSimmo commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • Make docs/outstanding-issues.md the single universal, ordered task ledger.
  • Surface only the recommended execution queue through repository memory and /issues.
  • Reclassify older backlog documents as supporting history or runbook detail and retain the paused document-accordion handoff as [WIP] Refactor monolithic front‑end and decouple domain logic #58.

RAG impact: no retrieval behaviour change — documentation and repository workflow only.

Verification

  • npm run verify:pr-local
  • npm run verify:ui when UI, routing, styling, browser behavior, reduced-motion, or forced-colors behavior changed
  • npm run verify:release before release or handoff confidence claims
  • Session-start hook syntax and runtime parsing: 23 recommended rows (2 P1, 9 P2, 12 P3)
  • Markdown formatting with the repository's existing Prettier installation
  • npm run docs:check-links (1,138 references)
  • npm run docs:check-index
  • npm run check:skills
  • Queue order, source-ID, next-ID, and archive invariants
  • git diff --check

Verification not run: verify:pr-local because this isolated worktree has no node_modules; no install or shared heavyweight gate was started for this docs/workflow-only change. Hosted required checks remain authoritative before merge.
UI verification not run: no product UI, routing, styling, or browser behavior changed.
Release verification not run: no release or runtime behavior changed.

Risk and rollout

  • Risk: Low. Repository task-memory and documentation workflow behavior changes; product runtime is unchanged.
  • Rollback: Revert the squash-merge commit to restore the prior open-items surfacing behavior.
  • Provider or production effects: None. This PR does not call providers, change secrets, deploy, or alter production data.

Clinical Governance Preflight

  • Source-backed claims still require linked source verification before clinical use
  • No patient-identifiable document workflow was introduced or expanded without explicit governance approval
  • Supabase target remains Clinical KB Database (sjrfecxgysukkwxsowpy)
  • Service-role keys and private document access remain server-only
  • Demo/synthetic content remains clearly separated from real clinical sources
  • Source metadata, review status, and outdated/unknown-source behavior remain conservative
  • Deployment classification/TGA SaMD impact was checked when clinical decision-support behavior changed

Notes


Note

Low Risk
Documentation and repository task-memory workflow only; no application runtime, retrieval, or provider behavior changes.

Overview
Establishes docs/outstanding-issues.md as the only active repository-wide work order via a new Recommended execution queue (ordered rows with acuity, classification, timing, estimates, and an execution contract) and expanded open items #52#58, including reconciled P1/P2 priorities and a paused document-accordion handoff as #58.

Retargets agent workflow to that queue: the SessionStart hook .claude/hooks/issues-surface.sh now parses and summarizes the recommended queue (not the Open items table); the issues skill and AGENTS.md require /issues reads and mutations to keep queue and source/archive rows in sync, with stricter evidence-based capture and commits only when authorized.

Demotes other docs to supporting history or runbook detailmaturity-backlog-workorders.md, rag-hybrid-findings-and-todo.md, and operator-backlog.md no longer act as independent task queues; docs/README.md, codebase-index.md, and production-readiness-checklist.md point recommended work at the universal ledger. Minor ledger housekeeping updates staging provision evidence and #25 webhook wording.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 2482830. Configure here.

@supabase

supabase Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This pull request has been ignored for the connected project sjrfecxgysukkwxsowpy because there are no changes detected in supabase directory. You can change this behaviour in Project Integrations Settings ↗︎.


Preview Branches by Supabase.
Learn more about Supabase Branching ↗︎.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Warning

Review limit reached

@BigSimmo, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 9 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: e69a1bf8-0a1c-405c-a667-2a8380a56127

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 705480a and 5c1f374.

📒 Files selected for processing (11)
  • .claude/hooks/issues-surface.sh
  • .claude/skills/issues/SKILL.md
  • AGENTS.md
  • docs/README.md
  • docs/branch-review-ledger.md
  • docs/codebase-index.md
  • docs/maturity-backlog-workorders.md
  • docs/operator-backlog.md
  • docs/outstanding-issues.md
  • docs/production-readiness-checklist.md
  • docs/rag-hybrid-findings-and-todo.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch codex/shared-task-ledger-c7306a

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@cursor cursor Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes using default effort and found 1 potential issue.

Fix All in Cursor

❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 2482830. Configure here.

Comment thread .claude/hooks/issues-surface.sh

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5433003c9b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread docs/outstanding-issues.md Outdated

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5c1f37486f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

| 14 | #011 | Change Supabase Auth allocation before compute scale-up | P3 | Defer until approved scale-up | Sol/high + Supabase operator | Immediately before the first compute resize | 1–2 hours plus soak |
| 15 | #007 | Choose the canonical Tools entry point | P3 | Requires user/product decision | Terra/high + product owner | When navigation ownership is available | 30–60 minutes decision; 2–4 hours implementation |
| 16 | #009 | Decide whether `/api/jobs` remains an ops-only surface | P3 | Requires operator decision | Terra/high + operations owner | Before expanding or documenting job operations | 30–60 minutes; 2–4 hours if removal/docs follow |
| 17 | #025 | Configure only approved webhooks and trigger delivery with named owners | P3 | Requires provider/operator decision | Sol/high + DevOps owner | After secret, endpoint, and alert ownership decisions | 2–4 hours plus provider setup |

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Keep #25 acuity synchronized with its source row

When /issues is read or filtered by acuity, this queue row presents #25 as P3 optional work even though the source row for #25 still marks it P2 and describes trigger-delivery secrets as blocking any at-least-once ingestion claim. That split makes the new queue demote a material ingestion/provider task while the source table says it remains should-do work; update either the queue acuity or the source row so the single ledger cannot give agents conflicting priority.

AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L463-L465

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@BigSimmo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Superseded by the completed universal-ledger reconciliation in #1112 and the preserved UI follow-up merged in #1116. Current origin/main contains the active queue and IDs #59-#65.

@BigSimmo BigSimmo closed this Jul 24, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant