didericis
3178453f83
Retire "sidecar" for the consolidated per-host path (PRD 0070 naming decision): the orchestrator is the umbrella/control plane, and the egress/git/supervise data-plane unit it runs is the "gateway". - git mv sidecar.py -> gateway.py and the two integration + one unit test files; DockerSidecar->DockerGateway, Sidecar->Gateway, SidecarError->GatewayError, SIDECAR_*->GATEWAY_*, ensure_sidecar-> ensure_gateway, sidecar_status->gateway_status, container name bot-bottle-orch-sidecar->bot-bottle-orch-gateway. - Prose rename across broker/registry/egress/policy_resolver + PRD 0070. - Preserved: the image name bot-bottle-sidecars, the BOT_BOTTLE_SIDECAR_IMAGE env var, Dockerfile.sidecars, and PRD 0069's own stage-name cross-references (that doc still uses "sidecar"). No behavior change. Full unit suite green (1679 tests; the 13 test_sidecar_init /bin/sleep errors are pre-existing NixOS-local noise). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WBMWTEtQdJ4W5UrWuLHCck
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 - Superseded by PRD NNNN — replaced by a later PRD; kept for history.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.