Conversation
Record 0019 says twice that the rule belongs in the contributing guide, where somebody starting an experiment meets it, and the guide carried no mention of it. The rule lived in docs/experiment-template.md alone, which a person reaches once they are filling in a record rather than when they are deciding whether the code they want to start from may be here at all and where it goes. What it prevents is a reader concluding the opposite of what 0019 decided. The list under "What may never be committed" ends with a line refusing a file whose licence forbids it being here and offers no route beside it, so the guide as it stood read as a board that does not take borrowed code. 0019 decides that it does, and says why: the questions that begin with existing code are a class this board wants. The section states what a run refuses and what it does not, because a rule written without that teaches a reader the gate is holding the whole of it. Two refusals exist. A borrowed directory in an experiment whose record declares nothing passes, which record 0013 requires. A second quarantine deeper inside an experiment passes too. Neither of those two is recalled: each was run against a tree built for it, and the second was confirmed by removing the licence file and watching the same tree turn red. That the paths leg reaches the new text was proved rather than assumed, by pointing one of its links at a file that is not in the tree and watching document-names-a-path-that-does-not-resolve refuse CONTRIBUTING.md for exactly that path. Closes #204 Signed-off-by: Nils Lehnen <30603423+iderex@users.noreply.github.com>
iderex
deleted the
borrowed/the-rule-where-somebody-starting-an-experiment-meets-it
branch
August 27, 2026 01:55
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #204.
Record
0019says twice that its rule belongs in the contributing guide, and theguide carried no mention of it. This adds one section under
## Starting an experiment, which is where somebody meets the question the rule answers.The means
Markdown prose in a file the guide already is, adding no language, no runtime and
no dependency. The obligation record
0019states is that a person starting anexperiment meets the rule, and the artefact that reaches that person is the guide
itself, so the means is fixed by the audience rather than chosen. The guards it
is judged by already exist: the paths leg of the invariants scan and the prose
format check both read this file today.
What the section says a run does not do
The point of the section is not to restate
0019, which it links instead. It isto say which parts of the rule a run holds and which it does not, because a rule
written without that teaches a reader the gate is holding all of it.
Two refusals exist:
Two things the section states as passing were run rather than reasoned about,
each against a tree built for it.
A
borrowed/directory in an experiment whose record declares noBorrowed:,carrying its licence file:
The same tree with that licence file removed, which is the neighbour that shows
the first refusal is reached at all rather than the walk missing the directory:
A second quarantine deeper inside an experiment, holding no licence file, while
the top-level one is correct:
So the one-directory-per-experiment limit
0019states is refused by nothing,and the section says so in those words instead of implying the gate keeps it.
That the guards reach the new text
The paths leg passing is not evidence that it read this section, so one link in
the new text was pointed at a file that is not in the tree:
Restored, and the literal is gone:
The gate, at this commit
gofmt -lprinted nothing, which is its passing result.No second reader
Nothing here has been read by anybody but me. There is no second reader on this
board tonight, so the evidence above stands in place of one rather than beside
one, and this sentence is not a formality: a change nobody else has read is what
this is, and the reader who merges it should read the diff rather than the list
of green ticks.
What this does not do
It does not build the third refusal. A
borrowed/directory in an experimentdeclaring nothing stays unrefused, that is what record
0013requires today, andwhether it should change is #188, which is open and waiting on a decision about
0013. This change documents that state and does not settle it.