|
| 1 | +# PLAN_PR_PLATFORM_VALIDATION_SUITE |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +## Goal |
| 4 | +Define a platform-level validation suite that verifies the full authoring, validation, remediation, |
| 5 | +packaging, runtime, streaming, plugin, and versioning flows across the accepted platform baseline. |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +## Context |
| 8 | +The project baseline now includes: |
| 9 | +- registry-aware editors |
| 10 | +- dependency graph |
| 11 | +- enforced validation |
| 12 | +- assistive remediation |
| 13 | +- strict packaging |
| 14 | +- strict runtime loader |
| 15 | +- editor experience layer |
| 16 | +- runtime streaming |
| 17 | +- plugin architecture |
| 18 | +- project versioning |
| 19 | + |
| 20 | +The next architectural layer is a repeatable validation suite that protects the platform against regressions |
| 21 | +and gives future PRs a stable target for acceptance. |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +## Scope |
| 24 | +- Define end-to-end platform scenarios |
| 25 | +- Define golden-path and failure-path validation cases |
| 26 | +- Define deterministic packaging/runtime verification cases |
| 27 | +- Define plugin/versioning/streaming validation coverage |
| 28 | +- Define reporting expectations for suite output |
| 29 | +- Define acceptance thresholds for future changes |
| 30 | + |
| 31 | +## Non-Goals |
| 32 | +- No engine core API changes |
| 33 | +- No replacement of existing validation engine contracts |
| 34 | +- No destructive migration requirements |
| 35 | +- No ad hoc one-off manual-only validation strategy |
| 36 | + |
| 37 | +## Core Suite Categories |
| 38 | +- baseline valid project flow |
| 39 | +- invalid reference enforcement flow |
| 40 | +- remediation confirmation flow |
| 41 | +- deterministic packaging comparison flow |
| 42 | +- runtime ready/fail-fast flow |
| 43 | +- streaming flow validation |
| 44 | +- plugin integration flow |
| 45 | +- project version compatibility flow |
| 46 | + |
| 47 | +## Proposed Suite Model |
| 48 | +```json |
| 49 | +{ |
| 50 | + "platformValidationSuite": { |
| 51 | + "version": 1, |
| 52 | + "scenarios": [], |
| 53 | + "reports": [], |
| 54 | + "status": "pass | fail" |
| 55 | + } |
| 56 | +} |
| 57 | +``` |
| 58 | + |
| 59 | +## Core Contracts |
| 60 | +1. The suite validates full flows, not isolated helpers only. |
| 61 | +2. Golden-path valid projects must pass end-to-end. |
| 62 | +3. Known-invalid projects must fail at the correct enforced boundaries. |
| 63 | +4. Remediation scenarios must demonstrate recoverability. |
| 64 | +5. Packaging and runtime determinism must be testable repeatedly. |
| 65 | +6. Plugin, versioning, and streaming support must be covered explicitly. |
| 66 | +7. Reports must be stable and readable for future automation. |
| 67 | +8. Engine core APIs remain unchanged. |
| 68 | + |
| 69 | +## Manual Validation Checklist |
| 70 | +1. Valid baseline project passes full flow. |
| 71 | +2. Invalid project fails at expected boundary. |
| 72 | +3. Remediation can return project to valid state. |
| 73 | +4. Packaging results remain deterministic. |
| 74 | +5. Runtime ready/fail-fast behavior is validated. |
| 75 | +6. Streaming behavior preserves correctness. |
| 76 | +7. Plugin integration is validated safely. |
| 77 | +8. Versioned project compatibility is validated. |
| 78 | +9. Reports are readable and stable. |
| 79 | + |
| 80 | +## Next Command |
| 81 | +BUILD_PR_PLATFORM_VALIDATION_SUITE |
0 commit comments