Pine/deepseek-harness
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 1 Packages Projects Releases 1 Wiki Activity

docs(rfc): classify RFCs by kind via path-encoded subdirectories

Browse Source 
Add a second axis to every RFC — its class (feature, bug-fix,
simplification, architecture, process, testing) — encoded in the path
as docs/rfc/{lifecycle}/{class}/file.md. The folder is the label, so
the closed set is enforced by structure rather than a parsed field.

Two new doc-sync gates back it:
- verify-rfc-classification: every RFC sits in a valid class folder and
  the README index lists it under the matching lifecycle→class heading.
- verify-doc-refs: every docs/*.md path cited in a packages|examples TS
  comment resolves — closes a drift class verify-md-links can't see, and
  catches the four comment refs this reorg moved.

The README gains a Classification section explaining the taxonomy and
per-class index sub-sections. A self-referential process RFC records why
the scheme is path-encoded and gated.
This commit is contained in:
Tianyi Cui
2026-06-20 22:29:45 +08:00
parent 906705e353
commit 605587e79c
92 changed files with 673 additions and 293 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
.agents/skills/dsh-find-simplifications/SKILL.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ This skill helps turn a broad "find things to simplify" request into evidence-ba
- Read `AGENTS.md`, especially the pre-release stance, tests-document-behavior section, conventions, defensive patterns, and Type Safety and Documentation section.
- Skim [docs/architecture.md](../../../docs/architecture.md) before judging anything under `packages/`; simplifications that fight the service map or event taxonomy need extra evidence.
- Use the RFC index ([docs/rfc/README.md](../../../docs/rfc/README.md)) to understand intentional architecture. The most relevant implemented examples are [drop mutable session summary](../../../docs/rfc/implemented/2026-06-19-drop-mutable-session-summary.md), [shared persistence write coordinator](../../../docs/rfc/implemented/2026-06-18-shared-persistence-write-coordinator.md), [capability seams](../../../docs/rfc/implemented/2026-06-13-capability-seams.md), and the twin adapter / dual persistence backend RFCs.
- Use the RFC index ([docs/rfc/README.md](../../../docs/rfc/README.md)) to understand intentional architecture. The most relevant implemented examples are [drop mutable session summary](../../../docs/rfc/implemented/simplification/2026-06-19-drop-mutable-session-summary.md), [shared persistence write coordinator](../../../docs/rfc/implemented/architecture/2026-06-18-shared-persistence-write-coordinator.md), [capability seams](../../../docs/rfc/implemented/architecture/2026-06-13-capability-seams.md), and the twin adapter / dual persistence backend RFCs.
- Treat dual LLM adapters and dual persistence backends as intentional by default. Do not propose deleting either twin/backend as "low effort" unless the user explicitly overrides that constraint. Removing an unused method or hook inside a protected seam can still be valid if it does not collapse the protected design.
## What Counts As A Strong Candidate