docs: address terra round-1 findings on 4b amendment (class-data classification, visibility audit witness, ruled request annotation)
ci/woodpecker/pr/ci Pipeline is running
ci/woodpecker/pr/ci Pipeline is running
This commit is contained in:
@@ -100,8 +100,14 @@ legacy flat data (future work; see §1.3).
|
|||||||
AND `hierarchy_grants` (§3) — A1 includes hierarchy-level access grants
|
AND `hierarchy_grants` (§3) — A1 includes hierarchy-level access grants
|
||||||
in the class. Every rule addressed to "the class" in this contract
|
in the class. Every rule addressed to "the class" in this contract
|
||||||
(payload prohibition, mutation path, audit) binds all five tables. Class
|
(payload prohibition, mutation path, audit) binds all five tables. Class
|
||||||
rows carry parentage, naming, grant, and audit-linkage data only — never
|
rows carry parentage, naming, grant, audit-linkage, and visibility-class
|
||||||
task, plan, or any business/orchestration payload.
|
data only — never task, plan, or any business/orchestration payload.
|
||||||
|
Visibility (`companies.visibility`, §2.8) is ratified by Amendment 1 as
|
||||||
|
authorization/disclosure data: it controls what the class discloses
|
||||||
|
about its own nodes, which sits inside A1 §8.1.2's
|
||||||
|
tenancy/authorization purpose for the class — it is not a payload
|
||||||
|
field, carries no business content, and widens the payload prohibition
|
||||||
|
for nothing else.
|
||||||
References from business/orchestration rows into the class are limited
|
References from business/orchestration rows into the class are limited
|
||||||
to exactly one form: the canonical `workspace_id` tenancy column that
|
to exactly one form: the canonical `workspace_id` tenancy column that
|
||||||
REQ-TEN-001 requires on every canonical row, referencing
|
REQ-TEN-001 requires on every canonical row, referencing
|
||||||
@@ -407,7 +413,8 @@ Binding on the implementing PRs (extends A1 §8.3):
|
|||||||
static analysis cannot see, and any such evasion found later is
|
static analysis cannot see, and any such evasion found later is
|
||||||
corrected as a conformance defect, not grandfathered.
|
corrected as a conformance defect, not grandfathered.
|
||||||
4. Audit witnesses: for each mutation class (create, rename, transfer,
|
4. Audit witnesses: for each mutation class (create, rename, transfer,
|
||||||
grant create/change/revoke, delete) — the event exists after commit
|
visibility change, grant create/change/revoke, delete) — the event
|
||||||
|
exists after commit
|
||||||
with actor/verb/target and same-transaction atomicity; a rolled-back
|
with actor/verb/target and same-transaction atomicity; a rolled-back
|
||||||
mutation leaves no event (rollback witness); a node delete's cascaded
|
mutation leaves no event (rollback witness); a node delete's cascaded
|
||||||
grant deletions are each covered by events; events survive deletion of
|
grant deletions are each covered by events; events survive deletion of
|
||||||
@@ -446,7 +453,11 @@ Binding on the implementing PRs (extends A1 §8.3):
|
|||||||
company — with the platform-admin accept control; top-level creation
|
company — with the platform-admin accept control; top-level creation
|
||||||
yields `visibility = 'private'` and accepts no visibility argument;
|
yields `visibility = 'private'` and accepts no visibility argument;
|
||||||
each visibility change emits its §5.2 audit event carrying old and
|
each visibility change emits its §5.2 audit event carrying old and
|
||||||
new values.
|
new values — the full audit pattern for the mutation class
|
||||||
|
(same-transaction atomicity, rollback leaving no event,
|
||||||
|
actor/verb/target, outbox delivery) is §6.4's, which enumerates
|
||||||
|
visibility change; this item adds only the old/new-value payload
|
||||||
|
assertion.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Ruling request
|
## Ruling request
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
@@ -1943,7 +1943,13 @@ contracts and are not additions:
|
|||||||
suffix at all — each contradicting PRD D4's no-lock-in
|
suffix at all — each contradicting PRD D4's no-lock-in
|
||||||
requirement (§4.4).
|
requirement (§4.4).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Ruling request
|
## Ruling request — RULED AGREED (Jason, 2026-08-27; Amendment 1)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The §5.2 decision below was ruled agreed: open eligible-user creation
|
||||||
|
stands (yielding private companies per Amendment 1), and the
|
||||||
|
"alternative if rejected" did not take effect. The request is retained
|
||||||
|
below as historical record of what was put to ruling; it is no longer
|
||||||
|
live.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Ratify sections 1–7 as written, with one decision embedded:
|
Ratify sections 1–7 as written, with one decision embedded:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user