Skip to content

docs(1234): close by deciding not to wire; nine baseline pairs are permanent - #1424

Merged
dc0sk merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/1234-close-sweep
Sep 20, 2026
Merged

dc0sk merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/1234-close-sweep

Conversation

@dc0sk

@dc0sk dc0sk commented Sep 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Follow-up to closing #1234 (issue closed 2026-09-20 by maintainer decision, not by implementation).

#1234's retirement half shipped in #1391; its wiring half was deferred 2026-09-19 after adversarial
review and is now closed as a decision rather than a backlog item. The alternative that deferral
named — [control_security] psk_file — was filed as #1408 and closed too, its one argument having
turned out to be false.

The correction

docs/dev/project/trace-link-baseline.txt described nine of its fifteen pairs as "Blocked on
#1234"
and listed REQ-CTL-04 "so that the day #1234 lands and it flips to enforced, it does not
fail on arrival."

That day is not coming, so both statements are now false. I wrote them yesterday, in #1420. They are
corrected in place — a retraction that lives only in a ledger is not a retraction.

The header now says the nine are permanent, not pending, gives the three reasons the wiring stays
unbuilt, and names the only thing that would take them off the list: a real keystore consumer, whose
criterion from this thread is multi-secret storage (identity key, trust store) — not a PSK.

Left alone deliberately

Scope

Docs-only, verified by filename rather than by intent (git diff --name-only origin/main...HEAD
returns nothing outside docs/) — #1419's lesson, where a "docs-only" PR carried engine.rs because
the branch had been cut from a code branch.

The ratchet is unaffected: TRACE: PASS — 15 grandfathered unlinkable scope pair(s) (0 new, 0 stale).
Only comments changed; no baseline entry moved.

Test results

suites=339 tests_passed=2574 tests_failed=0
GATE: PASS 3dac4b1437577fd55571940afe3c6a830c96ad19 clean 20260920T181108Z

Verification-objective: a baseline entry's stated reason must describe why it is there now, not a
resolution that has been decided against

Review: none — mechanical correction of statements a maintainer decision made false; the decision
itself was reviewed in docs/dev/reviews/review-1234-keystore-writer.md and recorded on #1234.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_0188ATCj6DZ9aRVQ2vSirua6

…rmanent

#1234's retirement half shipped in #1391; its wiring half was deferred 2026-09-19
after adversarial review and is now closed as a decision rather than a backlog item.
The alternative that deferral named (`psk_file`) was filed as #1408 and closed too.

`trace-link-baseline.txt`'s header said those nine pairs were "blocked on #1234" and
listed REQ-CTL-04 "so that the day #1234 lands and it flips to enforced, it does not
fail on arrival". That day is not coming, so the statement is false and is corrected
in place — a retraction only in the ledger is not a retraction.

Left alone deliberately: `inert_psk_key_id_warning` still says keystore-backed PSK
loading is not implemented (#1234), which is true, and a closed issue carrying the
decision is now the right pointer rather than a promise. REQ-CTL-04's registered
statement keeps "No production consumer yet (#1234)" — also still true.

Verification-objective: a baseline entry's stated reason must describe why it is there
now, not a resolution that has been decided against

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0188ATCj6DZ9aRVQ2vSirua6
@dc0sk
dc0sk merged commit 2ae91fb into main Sep 20, 2026
6 checks passed
@dc0sk
dc0sk deleted the docs/1234-close-sweep branch September 20, 2026 19:05
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