docs: map hard issue families and falsifiable execution slices - #3281
Chris0Jeky wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
f3552e7 to
cdfeae8
Compare
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: cdfeae8a20
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".
| ## Execution order | ||
|
|
||
| 1. **Quota experiment integrity (#1435).** Complete the corrected head's checks and review after the observed negative control. Restore the quarantined boundary contracts and retain independent fresh-file evidence. Keep this independent of CI-control and frontend PRs. | ||
| 2. **Bounded export cursor (#1399).** Establish the bounded persistence primitive before switching the streaming consumer. Keep the buffered export's full-history method and size guard unchanged. A primitive-only PR must explicitly leave the export N+1 open. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At the reviewed base, merge commit fc33245c for PR #3282 is already an ancestor and has added StreamByArtefactsForUserAsync, its integration tests, and the bounded-stream evidence note. This step therefore directs the next worker to establish work that has already shipped, while the actual remaining #1399 work is the consumer switch described in docs/analysis/2026-09-20-bounded-extraction-stream.md; update the execution order and the later “active engineering PRs” claim to reflect that post-merge state.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
This branch has not been deployed
1 participant
Requested hard-issue map
Adds
docs/analysis/2026-09-20-hard-issue-execution-map.mdwith seven ranked issue families, source/ZIP reconciliation, required invariants, falsifiable acceptance evidence, a dependency-aware execution order and maintainer-owned boundaries.Reviewed scope: 100 oldest open issues, current Priority I issues, current open PRs and focused implementation/test paths. This is a ranked engineering shortlist, not an exhaustive audit or a change to the accepted release queue.
Execution is already represented by #3280 (observed quota multi-host race, restored contracts and fresh-file tests) and #3282 (bounded export-history persistence primitive; endpoint consumer unchanged). The document records the observed quota evidence and makes the next export/revision/platform steps explicit.
No canonical STATUS/roadmap, workflow, settings, production code or human-acceptance changes.
Validation at
f3552e7113ac0633a4f35fa5c1f838c57ad4a5f8CI run 35482571384: Docs Governance (
106002929069) and Windows Worktree Helper (106002929064) both passed. Architecture, migration, release contracts, SAST, secrets, dependency signals and both frontend-platform jobs also passed at the inspected head. Smart CI Self-Test succeeded. The broad workflow still had backend/API work running at the latest check, so full required CI is not claimed complete.The document was self-reviewed against the live issue bodies and reconciled implementation. Independent automated review is not claimed; code-review requests on the engineering PRs were declined because the account allowance was exhausted. Kept draft and unmerged. No further exclusive document edit is claimed by this pass.