JesseMarkowitzandClaude Opus 5
279a871a77
Reporting pass only. No application code, no test, and no product requirement changes. Result: PASS WITH CORRECTIVE WORK REQUIRED. M4's Definition of Done is met and demonstrated at the API level, including across a real two-process restart. The load-bearing constraint holds under inspection rather than assertion: the only head-field assignment M4 added anywhere in the backend is one line in head.py, and an exhaustive grep of the diff finds no second mechanism that forks, prunes memories, reconstructs state, filters the transcript or recomputes Redo. Three corrective items, all M4's own, none in the head model: - GET /checkpoints is an N+1 fetching whole Action rows including prose -- measured at 53 SELECTs for 25 Save Points against 4 for the branch panel, in a codebase that keeps test_egress.py for this exact class of mistake; - deleting a branch silently deletes Save Points naming it, and the branch panel's confirmation does not say so. M4 added the consequence to an existing destructive action without updating its warning; - the shipped D11/L03 tests restart a client, not a process, so the suite is weaker than the acceptance items it is named for. Both pass here only because the report re-ran them across a real process boundary by hand. The browser smoke test is NOT PERFORMED, for M4 and still for M3. Firefox is a snap that hangs past 90s on a trivial headless screenshot; there is no Xvfb, no display, no driver library. Two consecutive milestones now carry an unperformed browser requirement, which the report raises as a standing acceptance risk rather than a defect in either milestone's code. Evidence recorded: 680 backend tests pass (42 M4, 130 M3 invariants, 93 security/local-only), frontend lint and build clean, Docker build clean, migration 80 verified against a representative pre-M4 database with both cascades and zero possible orphans, and I04 verified through a real round trip with branch ids remapped 1->3 and 2->4. M4 is NOT accepted by this report, and M5 is NOT authorized. That decision belongs to whoever reviews this. Rotation: planning/reports/M3-IMPLEMENTATION-REPORT.md moves to planning/archive/milestone-reports/ as a pure rename, contents unedited (git reports 100% similarity, 0 insertions, 0 deletions). Six path references in five active documents are updated because the path changed and for no other reason -- no status claim, no wording change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PWU4gTfLYY6Qq9U7aa9Qw2
4.4 KiB
ChatGPT Project Sources — what to upload
This file exists for one purpose: to tell the repository owner which files
belong in the InteractiveStory ChatGPT project's Sources. It is not a
documentation index — planning/README.md is that.
planning/project-sources.txt is the same list as bare paths, one per line, for
gathering the files.
The rule behind the list: upload what is authoritative now. A project source is treated as current fact by whatever reads it, so a superseded document uploaded alongside a current one does not add context — it manufactures a conflict.
Refresh the Sources whenever the planning package is revised (VERSION.md
records each revision) and whenever a milestone completes.
REQUIRED PROJECT SOURCES
Twenty-eight files.
Repository orientation
README.md
DEVELOPMENT.md
PROVENANCE.md
The planning index and its version
planning/README.md
planning/VERSION.md
Product requirements and design
planning/SPECIFICATION.md
planning/TECHNICAL-DESIGN.md
planning/DATA-MODEL.md
planning/STORY-BRANCH-SEMANTICS.md
planning/CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md
planning/IMPORTED-KNOWLEDGE-DESIGN.md
planning/SECURITY-THREAT-MODEL.md
planning/MEDIA-EXTENSION-CONTRACT.md
planning/BROWSER-UX-SPEC.md
Implementation plan and acceptance contract
planning/BUILD-MILESTONES.md
planning/V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md
planning/TEST-CAMPAIGN-FIXTURE.md
The active ADRs — all eleven. They are short, and each one closes a question that will otherwise be reopened.
planning/DECISIONS/001-browser-first.md
planning/DECISIONS/002-ollama-only-v1.md
planning/DECISIONS/003-authoritative-local-state.md
planning/DECISIONS/004-local-only-production.md
planning/DECISIONS/005-branch-preserving-history.md
planning/DECISIONS/006-genre-agnostic-core.md
planning/DECISIONS/007-future-media-extension.md
planning/DECISIONS/009-ai-dnd-production-base.md
planning/DECISIONS/010-explicit-typed-narrative-state-events.md
planning/DECISIONS/011-local-inference-endpoint-policy.md
planning/DECISIONS/012-active-head-non-destructive-history.md
ADR 008 is deliberately absent: it was the process gate requiring Phase 0 to
close before production work began, Phase 0 closed on 2026-09-01, and it is now
in planning/archive/decisions/.
CURRENT-MILESTONE SOURCE
One file, and it changes as development progresses:
planning/reports/M4-IMPLEMENTATION-REPORT.md
M3 is the most recently completed milestone, and M4 is the next to be briefed. This report is M3's review and its primary evidence record — no separate M3 baseline report was produced — so it is the only place some of what M3 left behind is written down, including the browser smoke test M3 still owes.
Replace it, do not accumulate. When M4's report lands, remove this one from
the project Sources and upload M4's instead. The repository does the same thing:
planning/reports/ holds the current milestone's report and
planning/archive/milestone-reports/ holds the rest.
DO NOT UPLOAD AS PROJECT SOURCES
Not because these are worthless — because a source is read as current fact, and these are not current.
- Everything under
planning/archive/. The Phase 0 research reports, the Phase 0B recommendation and spikes, the completed M1 and M2 milestone reports, and archived ADR 008. Every conclusion they reached that still matters has already been applied to the active documents; what is left is superseded reasoning that will contradict the current package if uploaded beside it. - Older milestone reports, once their successor exists. Uploading M1, M2 and M3 together produces three descriptions of the same subsystem at three different stages.
- Source code.
backend/,frontend/, tests, migrations. The planning package describes the system; the code is read in the repository, where it can be searched and run. - Inherited upstream documentation. Upstream AI-DnD's
plan/build log anddocs/guides, generated HTML and screenshots were deleted from this repository on 2026-09-03 for exactly this reason: they describe a hosted, scripted, multi-user product this fork removed. Do not re-upload them from upstream or from Git history. - Generated HTML, images and screenshots. They add tokens, not facts.
repo-inventory.txtor any other local scratch output. Not tracked, not authoritative, stale the moment it is written.