Files
bot-bottle/docs/prds
didericis-claude c62d57d5ac docs: narrow PRD to per-bottle signed identity & audit attribution
Revised per PR #480 review (#5518#5556):

- Rename: "forge subroles" → "per-bottle signed identity & audit
  attribution"; rename the file to match.
- Reframe the guarantee as bottle/activation provenance, not
  cryptographically-vouched author identity. Author/committer name/email
  is a claim carried inside the signed object, made trustworthy by a
  git-gate acceptance check + the host record, not by the signature.
- Add the gate-side acceptance check: on push, every newly-introduced
  commit (excluding upstream-reachable history) must verify against the
  activation key AND match git-gate.user in both author and committer
  fields, else the push is rejected. Host verifies the signature before
  recording a SHA as attributed.
- Audit: retain full public key + fingerprint + principal + validity
  interval (not fingerprint-only); state allowed-signers generation.
- Drop from scope: forge subuser accounts, provisioned API tokens/PAT
  minting, forge status/Verified badges -> future "forge actors" PRD.
  This removes the Gitea PAT bootstrap problem entirely.
- Manifest: drop git-forge/forge-accounts; reuse git-gate.user as the
  enforced identity + add opt-in git-gate.signing. Push stays PRD 0048
  deploy keys, unchanged.

Issue: #423

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-25 22:18:48 -04:00
..
2026-05-07 22:45:36 -04:00

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 main and 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  • Superseded by PRD NNNN — replaced by a later PRD; kept for history.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.