didericis-claude
245f258f20
Revised per PR #480 review (#5590 + didericis-codex review on d8362ec):
- Remove author/committer enforcement entirely (#5590). The gate no
longer matches identity fields; author/committer are recorded as
claims in the audit store. Drop the git-gate.signing.enforce knob
(which also resolves codex issue 1: a knob that weakened the stated
guarantee). Add a "Deferred: identity enforcement" section noting it
as a possible future add. Rename PRD/file to "signed commits & audit
attribution" since identity is no longer guaranteed.
- Fix control-plane vs data-plane verification (codex issue 2, PRD 0070):
git-gate (data plane) does a synchronous pre-forward SIGNATURE check
only; the orchestrator/control plane (sole owner of bot-bottle.db)
independently re-verifies each signature before writing attributed_commit.
A gateway assertion alone never creates an audit row. New "Trust
boundary" + "Control-plane verification & recording" sections.
- Reframe the guarantee to signed provenance + host-owned, independently
verified audit record; ADR 0002 "claimed, not vouched" posture kept.
- attributed_commit now records claimed author/committer columns.
Issue: #423
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Product requirement docs
One PRD per feature: what to build, why, and how it's scoped. The PRD
is the durable spec — it should stand on its own without a Gitea issue
thread (see ../README.md for when a PRD is the right
document vs. a research note or a decision record).
Naming and numbering
New PRDs use a prd-new-<kebab-title>.md placeholder name while the PR
is open. On merge to main a CI workflow assigns the next sequential
number (0024-…, 0025-…), renames the file, and updates the title
header. Numbers are never reused; gaps are fine.
Once numbered, the filename stays fixed for the life of the doc.
Status
The Status: line near the top tracks the PRD's lifecycle:
- Draft — proposed, not yet shipped.
- Active — the design has shipped to
mainand is in effect. - Superseded by PRD NNNN — replaced by a later PRD; kept for history.
- Retargeted by PRD NNNN — folded into a later PRD's scope.
Format
# PRD prd-new: <short title> ← placeholder; CI fills in the number on merge
- **Status:** Draft
- **Author:** <who>
- **Created:** YYYY-MM-DD
- **Issue:** #<n> # optional — convenience pointer only
## Summary
One paragraph: what this builds and the pain it solves.
## Problem
The current state and why it's inadequate.
## Goals / Success Criteria
Bullets a reviewer can check the finished work against.
## Non-goals
What this explicitly does not do — and won't, to head off scope creep.
## Scope
In scope / out of scope, when the boundary needs spelling out.
## Design
How it works: schema, data flow, diagrams, algorithms as needed.
## Implementation chunks
Ordered, mergeable steps (optional; for multi-PR features).
## Open questions
Unresolved decisions — resolve or fold into Design before shipping.
Sections are a guide, not a straitjacket: drop the ones a given PRD doesn't need (a small change rarely needs Scope or Implementation chunks) and add others where they help (e.g. Testing strategy, Alternatives considered, References). Keep the rationale self-contained — inline the reasoning rather than linking out to an issue thread, so the PRD survives a move off Gitea.