docs: tombstone; superseded by enrahitu and the statecraft factory service

[bartekus]

Replaces the README with an archive notice pointing at the successors. Precedes archiving this repository.

[github-actions]

AI Code Review

This diff is a pure documentation tombstone with no code changes. Here is the review.

---

Review: README.md tombstone

No code changes

This diff touches only README.md. There are no generator, spec, contract, or workflow edits. Criteria 1 (bugs), 2 (security), and 4 (determinism/lockstep) have nothing to evaluate.

---

Spec-spine compliance

README.md is not in the hashed corpus (spec-spine.toml hashes standards/**, .github/workflows/**, and the always-hashed core). No coupling-gate concern.

No spec annotations were added or removed, so there is nothing for spec-spine couple to reject.

Pass.

---

Issues

1. Repository state contradicts the tombstone

The README says "Archived" but the repository is not actually archived (no GitHub Archive flag, active CI surface with nine workflows, live spec-spine corpus, working generator). Any contributor or agent cloning this repo will load CLAUDE.md with full active working rules ("Build & verify", "House style", etc.) while the README claims the project is dead. That contradiction is misleading and will cause confusion for automated tooling that reads both files.

Recommendation: either archive the repository on GitHub (Settings > Archive) so the UI makes the state unambiguous, or soften the README to "no longer actively developed" rather than "Archived."

2. CLAUDE.md still cross-references README.md as authoritative

CLAUDE.md line 7: "See README.md for the architecture...". After this PR that pointer leads to a 16-line tombstone, not the architecture. CLAUDE.md should either be updated to remove the reference or point to the git history permalink.

3. External URLs are not pinned and not verifiable at review time

The tombstone links to three external resources:

• https://github.com/statecrafting/enrahitu
• https://github.com/statecrafting/statecraft
• https://statecraft.ing

These are third-party URLs with no SHA pin, no snapshot, and no redirect guarantee. For a permanent archive notice those links are the only navigation aid; if the repos are renamed or the domain lapses the tombstone points nowhere. Consider adding a note like "links valid as of [date]" or archiving the original README to docs/README-original.md as a self-contained fallback rather than relying solely on git history (which is harder to reach for most users).

4. Minor: past-tense framing is inconsistent

"factory-encore was a technology-agnostic software factory" -- but the spec corpus, generator, and all code in the repository are present-tense artifacts. The copy implies the codebase itself is gone; it isn't. The git-history note at the end partially corrects this but it is easy to misread.

---

Summary

No functional, security, or governance defects. The only issues are documentation-layer inconsistencies: the "Archived" claim is not backed by a real GitHub archive action, CLAUDE.md still points to the README as a live architecture reference, and the external URL links are unanchored. None of these block merge, but they should be addressed before or shortly after merge to avoid confusing agents and contributors who read CLAUDE.md alongside the new README.

---

Automated review by Claude. Diff size: 16 lines.