Phase 1 — architecture design #2

New Issue

sol · 2026-04-06T14:37:56+02:00

sol commented

2026-04-06 14:37:56 +02:00

Write DESIGN.md with target stack, data flows, storage, observability. List openclaw dependencies to remove and features to keep depending on. Surface choices as DMG brief. Define the feature-parity test list. Exit: DESIGN.md signed off by Rooh.

sol commented

2026-04-06 14:57:49 +02:00

Phase 1 work started 2026-04-06 13:00 UTC. Two opus subagents running in parallel:

Plan agent drafting DESIGN.md — target architecture diagram, components, data flows, storage, observability, security contract, failure modes, parallel-run plan, rollback procedure.
general-purpose agent drafting FEATURE-PARITY-TESTS.md (40+ tests across 3 tiers) and DEPENDENCIES.md (openclaw dependency matrix with REMOVE/REPLACE/KEEP/BLOCKING categories).

Both reading the three Phase 0 research reports as input. Expected to produce the Phase 1 deliverables without further coordination.

Phase 1 work started 2026-04-06 13:00 UTC. Two opus subagents running in parallel: 1. **Plan agent** drafting `DESIGN.md` — target architecture diagram, components, data flows, storage, observability, security contract, failure modes, parallel-run plan, rollback procedure. 2. **general-purpose agent** drafting `FEATURE-PARITY-TESTS.md` (40+ tests across 3 tiers) and `DEPENDENCIES.md` (openclaw dependency matrix with REMOVE/REPLACE/KEEP/BLOCKING categories). Both reading the three Phase 0 research reports as input. Expected to produce the Phase 1 deliverables without further coordination.

sol commented

2026-04-06 15:16:54 +02:00

Phase 1 drafts complete.

DESIGN.md — 352 lines, full architecture spec with 3 data flows, 11 failure modes, rollback procedure, dependency matrix on openclaw.
FEATURE-PARITY-TESTS.md — 74 tests across 3 tiers (T1=34 mandatory, T2=25 should-pass, T3=15 nice-to-have). Covers repo creation, auth/ingress, event routing, idempotency/dedup, locking, observability, rollback, push/scan/policy, spawn pipeline, trust levels, cron, delivery.
DEPENDENCIES.md — 28-row matrix. REMOVE: 2, REPLACE: 19, KEEP: 6, BLOCKING: 5.

5 blocking items that need Rooh sign-off before Phase 2 code:

Webhook secret provisioning — where the HMAC secret lives, who sets it on Gitea side
nginx config write access for the new /hooks/caret location block + reload permission
Gitea token admin scope — elevate sol token for read:admin/write:admin, or accept manual one-time system-webhook registration
Secret rotation story — shared vs separate credential dirs, rotation drill ownership
Spawn signature secret ownership — Caret-owned vs shared with openclawss existing spawn-secret

Plus 8 additional design questions in DESIGN.md awaiting answers (nginx route, channels plugin path, listener user, alert chat, Phase 4 canary repos, judgment rate limit, non-goals override, admin scope choice).

Phase 1 drafts complete. - `DESIGN.md` — 352 lines, full architecture spec with 3 data flows, 11 failure modes, rollback procedure, dependency matrix on openclaw. - `FEATURE-PARITY-TESTS.md` — 74 tests across 3 tiers (T1=34 mandatory, T2=25 should-pass, T3=15 nice-to-have). Covers repo creation, auth/ingress, event routing, idempotency/dedup, locking, observability, rollback, push/scan/policy, spawn pipeline, trust levels, cron, delivery. - `DEPENDENCIES.md` — 28-row matrix. REMOVE: 2, REPLACE: 19, KEEP: 6, BLOCKING: 5. **5 blocking items that need Rooh sign-off before Phase 2 code:** 1. Webhook secret provisioning — where the HMAC secret lives, who sets it on Gitea side 2. nginx config write access for the new `/hooks/caret` location block + reload permission 3. Gitea token admin scope — elevate sol token for `read:admin`/`write:admin`, or accept manual one-time system-webhook registration 4. Secret rotation story — shared vs separate credential dirs, rotation drill ownership 5. Spawn signature secret ownership — Caret-owned vs shared with openclawss existing spawn-secret Plus 8 additional design questions in DESIGN.md awaiting answers (nginx route, channels plugin path, listener user, alert chat, Phase 4 canary repos, judgment rate limit, non-goals override, admin scope choice).

sol commented

2026-04-06 15:17:33 +02:00

[INFO] Reviewed the Phase 1 summary. The architecture/test/dependency work looks complete enough to move into decision review, but the 5 blocking items are governance/infrastructure choices that need owner sign-off before Phase 2 starts.

Recommended next step:

Rooh answers the 5 blocking items explicitly.
The 8 remaining design questions in DESIGN.md get resolved or marked deferred with defaults.
Once those decisions are written into the issue or DESIGN.md, Phase 1 can be considered signed off and implementation can start.

Until then, the safe status is: design drafted, awaiting owner decisions, not ready for code yet.

If helpful, I can turn the blockers/questions into a compact approval checklist in the issue so sign-off is one pass instead of a back-and-forth.

[INFO] Reviewed the Phase 1 summary. The architecture/test/dependency work looks complete enough to move into decision review, but the 5 blocking items are governance/infrastructure choices that need owner sign-off before Phase 2 starts. Recommended next step: 1. Rooh answers the 5 blocking items explicitly. 2. The 8 remaining design questions in DESIGN.md get resolved or marked deferred with defaults. 3. Once those decisions are written into the issue or DESIGN.md, Phase 1 can be considered signed off and implementation can start. Until then, the safe status is: design drafted, awaiting owner decisions, not ready for code yet. If helpful, I can turn the blockers/questions into a compact approval checklist in the issue so sign-off is one pass instead of a back-and-forth.

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: sol/openclaw-to-caret-migration#2