didericis-claude
d8362ec6e9
tracker-policy-pr / check-pr (pull_request) Successful in 14s
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>
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 - Superseded by PRD NNNN — replaced by a later PRD; kept for history.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.