Skip to content

docs(roadmap): repoint p8 discovery's two citations of the removed migration inventory - #566

Merged
JArmandoAnaya merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/p8-discovery-citations
Aug 12, 2026
Merged

docs(roadmap): repoint p8 discovery's two citations of the removed migration inventory#566
JArmandoAnaya merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/p8-discovery-citations

Conversation

@JArmandoAnaya

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Follow-up to #563. Removing docs/roadmap/_migration/00-inventory.md — a Phase 0 scratch inventory that declared itself "deleted in Phase 4" — left two citations of it in docs/roadmap/pillars/p8_discovery.md: one in §7's prose, one in the sources table. Both were inline code spans rather than links, so lychee never flagged them, but they pointed at a path that no longer exists.

The claim was staler than the path

Verified before repointing, and it had gone out of date twice over:

§7 asserts today
"GW-6 does not exist" it does — gw6_scenarios.md, drafted ahead of the pillar in #521
golden_workflows/README.md:29 is an unlinked row linked, same change
GW-6's hand-runs are "Blocked by #249" #249 is closed (p8-s5), so nothing is blocked by it

What has not happened is the issue creation the inventory planned: the three GW-6 hand-run issues, and the v0.1.0 gate milestone that would hold them, still do not exist. That is precisely why epic #257 stays open, so the amendment points there rather than inventing a new home for the fact.

Why the finding is amended, not rewritten

p8_discovery.md opens with "Written 2026-07-29, before any P8 sprint starts." It is a dated snapshot, and rewriting its findings to present-day truth would falsify the record of what the discovery pass actually found. So this follows the convention already in the same file — the > **Amendment, 2026-07-30.** block at §6 — and appends an > **Amendment, 2026-08-12.** under the original paragraph.

The §7 heading is deliberately left as-is for the same reason, and because changing it would break the anchor (nothing links to it today, but the record reads better intact).

The two surviving mentions of _migration/00-inventory.md are intentional: they name the removed file as provenance, in code spans, so nothing dangles.

Verification

lychee --offline --include-fragments --no-progress "docs/**/*.md" "*.md" — the exact args CI's docs job uses: 1030 OK, 0 errors, 548 unique links. The one new relative link (../golden_workflows/gw6_scenarios.md) resolves.

Docs-only; no code paths touched.

…gration inventory (#563)

`docs/roadmap/_migration/00-inventory.md` was a Phase 0 scratch inventory that
declared itself deleted at Phase 4; it was removed as the last step of #563.
p8_discovery.md cited it twice — once in §7's prose, once in the sources table
— for the fact that GW-6's three hand-run issues are "Blocked by #249".

Checking that claim before repointing it showed it had gone stale twice over:
GW-6 now EXISTS (gw6_scenarios.md, drafted ahead of the pillar in #521, so the
README row §7 calls unlinked is linked), and #249 is CLOSED. What has not
happened is the issue creation itself — the three hand-run issues and the
v0.1.0 gate milestone that would hold them still do not exist, which is the
reason epic #257 stays open.

p8_discovery.md is a dated snapshot ("Written 2026-07-29, before any P8 sprint
starts"), so the finding is history and is not rewritten. It gets an
`> **Amendment, 2026-08-12.**` block instead, matching the 2026-07-30 amendment
already in this file, and the §7 heading is left alone so the record of what
was found on the day stays readable.

The two remaining mentions of the old path are deliberate: they name the removed
file as provenance, in code spans rather than links, so nothing dangles.

lychee --offline --include-fragments over docs/**/*.md + *.md: 1030 OK, 0 errors.
@JArmandoAnaya
JArmandoAnaya merged commit c7a3f5a into main Aug 12, 2026
13 checks passed
@JArmandoAnaya
JArmandoAnaya deleted the docs/p8-discovery-citations branch August 12, 2026 16:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant