2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
dongarandClaude Opus 5.5	1ad0b2147d	Retire the old build spec, and point every reference at the architecture (M0.1) ... Development Plan M0.1. Every section reference in code, tests, specs/, the example config, the tuning guide, and the CLAUDE.md and README files now cites docs/Architecture.md (P, L, D, O, X, Q) instead of the old spec's A-H, and docs/Architecture-Build-Spec.md is deleted (git keeps it). The plan's old-to-new table goes with it. Mostly mechanical, with a per-site choice where one old section split: A4 became L2 where it meant stop/abandon/the loop and L3 where it meant approvals; A10 became L6 in the context-budget code and L7 elsewhere; B2 became D4 for outbound Gitea and publishing and D5 for review intake; 'A3 step N' became the matching step of L8's boot sequence. Comments describing behaviour the architecture drops (planning always escalating, thresholds tuned at an old build step) now describe the current code and point at the Development Plan. docs/Architecture.md gains one line the rewrite missed: intake outages delay but never fail work (old B2), now in L5, where the poller and Matrix code cite it. Comments and docs only; no behaviour change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PPQ14L3LikyefCMFBqEbKE	2026-10-01 00:17:48 +00:00
dongarandClaude Opus 5	affdb9e8aa	Add PR comment intake and the review loop (B2) — step 6b ... - poller.py: CommentPoller polls PR comments rather than taking webhooks, keeping the VM outbound-only (B3). On an outage it backs off exponentially, caps, and retries indefinitely while logging: polling is pure intake, so an outage delays a reaction but never fails a task or forces a transition - prime() marks the existing thread as seen without delivering it, so starting a watch does not re-address feedback already handled - Review loop: a comment in PR_OPEN enters the canonical transcript, the executor responds, and the fix is pushed to the same branch with a reply on the PR. No intent is recorded for a follow-up push — the PR already exists, so a repeated push is harmless, unlike opening a second PR - Comment authors are checked against a separate Gitea operator allowlist: a PR comment is an instruction channel into an agent that writes code, so it is operator-scoped, and a Gitea login is not a Matrix MXID (A4 per-channel allowlists) - Orchestrator now holds a lock: transport and the poller deliver on separate threads, and state transitions must not interleave - Backoff timings are injectable, so the outage path is tested in milliseconds instead of being untestable Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-09-07 21:59:50 +00:00