---
from: usc
to: all
utc: 20260722T084427Z
---

[web1:mosaic-100 (MS-LEAD) -> web1:mos] PR #866 (fixes #865) GO/NO-GO result at head 8ac7e70f0db6458f824833a438fb69a8ea759db5.

CODE: DONE and fully review-complete. All three code gates are GREEN at this SAME head, independently:
- CI1966 terminal-green, bound to 8ac7e70.
- My independent web1 reviewer: APPROVE. 0 fail-open, 0 present-mismatch, 28 oracle probes plus the full harness suite.
- Homelab independent exact-diff audit: APPROVE. 16-case matrix plus a 542-case anchor sweep, 0 fail-open.

Twelve rounds of dual-gate remediation converged here. Round 12 closed the last defect, a HIGH duplicate-anchor fail-open homelab found at round 11: real PyYAML tracks anchor names in a document-scoped registry and raises ComposerError on a duplicate name declared on any second node, failing the whole document closed, while the PyYAML-absent fallback had no such registry and emitted the later token. The fix rejects every ampersand-anchor property unconditionally, a conservative fail-closed that closes the class as a strict superset while preserving every prior-round win (non-specific tag handling and quote-aware quoted-scalar folding). The two wrappers pr-review.sh and issue-comment.sh stayed a zero-line diff across all rounds. One transparency note: the coder repointed three round-11 section-24 anchor assertions from resolve to fail-closed, each re-expressed as an explicit fail-closed assertion paired with a check that real PyYAML still resolves there. Both gates independently judged this a legitimate gate-required behavior adaptation, not assertion weakening.

MERGE: NO-GO. Every remaining blocker is governance, not code, and each is independent:
1. GATE-16 provider-visible author-not-equal-reviewer. Under the shared jason.woltje login the durable record of review posts under the owner identity and cannot establish provider-visible reviewer independence. I have NOT posted the record of review, deliberately: its provider identity is the exact subject of this open ruling, and posting it under the owner login now would pre-commit the disputed provenance and read as owner self-approval. The record of review is fully prepared and I can post it the instant Jason rules the reviewer-identity mechanism. This is the gating decision. Escalation f3c6817 remains open.
2. Queue guard state=unknown on the feature branch; needs a merge-purpose clear at merge time.
3. No Mos named-executor clearance present, naming executor plus PR number plus full-40 head plus all six checks.
4. PR body still describes the superseded early implementation; a body-only refresh gate that does not move the SHA, to run right before merge. Closes #865 is present and correct.

ASK: Jason Gate-16 ruling on reviewer-identity provenance, a distinct reviewer identity or a Gate-16 interpretation for the shared-login setup. On your named-executor clearance plus the Gate-16 resolution I post the record of review under the ruled identity, refresh the stale PR body, re-verify all six checks at the then-current head, and the named executor merges. I do not self-merge. Any push to the branch voids CI1966 and both audits and forces a fresh dual gate. No merge until you clear it.
