docs: add central project source and scope governance#157
Conversation
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request establishes foundational governance and project documentation by adding CONTRIBUTING.md, NON_GOALS.md, and docs/project_source.md. These documents define the project's core thesis on deterministic replay-integrity, strict scope boundaries, and the RFC process. Review feedback highlights the need for consistent project naming ('CompText V7') according to the style guide and the replacement of informal terminology like 'semantic-vibes' with more technical language. Additionally, suggestions were made to remove specific pull request references to ensure documentation longevity and to reduce content duplication between files.
| @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ | |||
| # Project Source: CompTextv7 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The project name is inconsistently formatted. The Repository Style Guide and README.md use CompText V7 (with a space and capital V), while this document uses CompTextv7. Please unify the naming across all documentation for consistency.
| # Project Source: CompTextv7 | |
| # Project Source: CompText V7 |
References
- The project name should be formatted as CompText V7 as specified in the Repository Style Guide. (link)
| ## State After PR #155 and PR #156 | ||
| After PR #155, the existing `mcp_trace_replay` fixture family was hardened via explicit capability-boundary structures, deterministic degraded variants, `failure_label_on_violation` handling, regenerated artifacts, and preserved scope by avoiding runtime/orchestration/LLM/embedding/fuzzy behavior. | ||
|
|
||
| After PR #156, a deterministic artifact evidence index was added to map committed evidence artifacts to their generators, evidence categories, fixture-family coverage, manifest alignment, deterministic evaluation status, LLM-free status, and external-API-free status. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Anchoring the project's canonical source documentation to specific pull request numbers (#155, #156) makes the content prone to becoming stale. It is better to describe the current capabilities and architectural state directly without referencing the PR history.
| ## State After PR #155 and PR #156 | |
| After PR #155, the existing `mcp_trace_replay` fixture family was hardened via explicit capability-boundary structures, deterministic degraded variants, `failure_label_on_violation` handling, regenerated artifacts, and preserved scope by avoiding runtime/orchestration/LLM/embedding/fuzzy behavior. | |
| After PR #156, a deterministic artifact evidence index was added to map committed evidence artifacts to their generators, evidence categories, fixture-family coverage, manifest alignment, deterministic evaluation status, LLM-free status, and external-API-free status. | |
| ## Current Implementation State | |
| The mcp_trace_replay fixture family is hardened via explicit capability-boundary structures, deterministic degraded variants, and failure_label_on_violation handling. A deterministic artifact evidence index maps committed evidence artifacts to their generators and categories, ensuring LLM-free and external-API-free validation. |
| ## Non-Goals | ||
| CompTextv7 does not pursue: | ||
| - runtime agent orchestration | ||
| - autonomous runtime tool routing | ||
| - probabilistic semantic judging | ||
| - LLM judging | ||
| - embeddings or vector retrieval layers | ||
| - cloud-first observability platforms | ||
| - generalized AI governance platform expansion |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This section duplicates the content in NON_GOALS.md. To maintain a single source of truth and prevent divergence, consider referencing the central NON_GOALS.md file instead of listing them again here.
| ## Non-Goals | |
| CompTextv7 does not pursue: | |
| - runtime agent orchestration | |
| - autonomous runtime tool routing | |
| - probabilistic semantic judging | |
| - LLM judging | |
| - embeddings or vector retrieval layers | |
| - cloud-first observability platforms | |
| - generalized AI governance platform expansion | |
| ## Non-Goals | |
| See NON_GOALS.md in the repository root for the full list of prohibited expansion paths and the hard scope test. |
|
|
||
| Hard scope test: | ||
|
|
||
| “Does this improve deterministic replay-integrity validation for compressed operational traces without adding probabilistic judgment, orchestration behavior, runtime dependency, cloud dependency, semantic-vibes evaluation, or platform expansion?” |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The term semantic-vibes evaluation is informal and lacks the technical precision found in the rest of the project's documentation. Consider using probabilistic semantic evaluation to maintain a professional tone consistent with the mission.
| “Does this improve deterministic replay-integrity validation for compressed operational traces without adding probabilistic judgment, orchestration behavior, runtime dependency, cloud dependency, semantic-vibes evaluation, or platform expansion?” | |
| “Does this improve deterministic replay-integrity validation for compressed operational traces without adding probabilistic judgment, orchestration behavior, runtime dependency, cloud dependency, probabilistic semantic evaluation, or platform expansion?” |
| - tool routing platform behavior | ||
| - LLM judging | ||
| - embeddings/vector retrieval | ||
| - probabilistic semantic-vibes evaluation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The term semantic-vibes is informal. Using probabilistic semantic evaluation would be more consistent with the technical nature of the project and the terminology used in the non-goals checklist.
| - probabilistic semantic-vibes evaluation | |
| - probabilistic semantic evaluation |
1 participant
Motivation
Description
docs/project_source.md, addedNON_GOALS.md, and addedCONTRIBUTING.mdwith the required PR checklist and merge/evidence-index guidance; this is documentation-only with no code, fixture, validator, artifact, or workflow changes.docs/project_source.mdcontains the mandated sections including exact preserved lines: the canonical positioning, the core question, and the research direction, plus strategy, RFC process, merge policy, risk register, and one-sentence rule.NON_GOALS.mdencodes prohibited expansion paths and includes the hard scope test exactly as required.CONTRIBUTING.mdprovides the required PR checklist, non-goals checklist, artifact regeneration expectations, determinism and taxonomy rules, RFC requirement, and an evidence-index reminder.artifacts/evidence_index.json,scripts/generate_evidence_index.py,tests/test_evidence_index.py, validators, fixtures, or any runtime/orchestration code, and does not regenerate artifacts or introduce LLM/embedding/fuzzy behavior.Testing
npm run checkwhich executes layout, typecheck, validate, build, and test; the full test suite completed successfully andnpm run checkpassed.pytestran the repository tests (283 passed) and thenpmpipeline tasks completed without error.Codex Task