jpmschweitzerandClaude
272b59e752
test / unit + widget + golden + a11y (push) Failing after 41s
test / integration_test (xvfb) (push) Has been skipped
test / bundle smoke (xvfb 5s) (push) Has been skipped
test / daemon subprocess + web WASM smoke (push) Has been skipped
D-043: adopt token palettes from design, reject Material wrapper. D-044: four bundled themes replace summer-night. D-045: syntax highlighting tokens in the theme pipeline. Q-025: body text face — mono everywhere vs Josefin Sans + mono. R-012: MaterialApp wrapper rejected (conflicts with D-007). Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
75 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
75 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
# Open Questions — Architecture
|
|
|
|
IPC, events, canvas, window chrome, macOS signing, pql absorption,
|
|
ticket persistence.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Q-001: Authorisation granularity on the IPC socket
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** The daemon's token auth is coarse (allow all / deny all). Do we need per-subsystem grants later (e.g. restrict `git push`), and if so, what's the model — capability tokens? An explicit grant table per client? Time-limited grants?
|
|
- **Context:** Surfaced in the old ADR 0006 open-questions footer; deferred until Tier 1 is in real use.
|
|
- **Source:** ADR 0006 (migrated to [D-006](architecture.md)).
|
|
|
|
### Q-002: Back-pressure on event streams
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** A subscriber that falls behind on `pane.output` (a firehose) needs a policy: drop oldest, block producer, coalesce, or kill subscriber. Which?
|
|
- **Context:** The event bus is in-memory; back-pressure policy is undefined. Defer until Tier 1 is in real use and we have a real firehose to measure against.
|
|
- **Source:** ADR 0006 (migrated to [D-006](architecture.md)).
|
|
|
|
### Q-003: Event persistence + audit/undo
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** Events are in-memory only in v1. If a future need (audit log, undo history) wants persistence, is it a property of the bus or a subsystem that subscribes and writes?
|
|
- **Context:** ADR 0006 leaned "subsystem that subscribes and writes" but didn't commit.
|
|
- **Source:** ADR 0006 (migrated to [D-006](architecture.md)).
|
|
|
|
### Q-004: `.canvas` schema compatibility with Obsidian
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** Clide's canvas (Tier 5) should read/write something — either Obsidian's `.canvas` JSON schema verbatim, a compatible-ish superset, or our own format. Each has trade-offs.
|
|
- **Context:** Obsidian's canvas users might want their canvases portable; conversely, bending to Obsidian's schema constrains our canvas features.
|
|
- **Source:** CLAUDE.md "Open questions" footer.
|
|
|
|
### Q-005: IPC wire-format stability + `schema_version:`
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** When do we freeze the IPC envelope / schema and introduce `schema_version:` in `project.yaml`? What's the bump policy for breaking changes?
|
|
- **Context:** Covered partially by [D-006](architecture.md)'s `v: 1` starting point; CLAUDE.md flags this as "decide when the first real subcommand lands."
|
|
- **Source:** CLAUDE.md "Open questions" footer.
|
|
|
|
### Q-006: Window chrome — native frame vs frameless custom
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** Does clide ship with the OS-native window frame (title bar, min/max/close from the WM) or a frameless custom chrome that gives us pixel control at the cost of reimplementing window controls per-platform?
|
|
- **Context:** Surfaced during Tier-0 plumbing discussion; decision deferred.
|
|
- **Source:** 2026-04-21 planning.
|
|
|
|
### Q-007: macOS app bundle signing / notarisation
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** Distributing a signed macOS `.app` requires a Developer ID and a notarisation pipeline. Do we gate macOS builds on this (Tier 6), or ship unsigned with a known "right-click, open" user workflow for early testers?
|
|
- **Context:** Linux is primary; macOS is a stretch target. Notarisation is a separate cost from the Flutter build.
|
|
- **Source:** 2026-04-21 planning.
|
|
|
|
### Q-021: Pql absorbs planning vs keeps separate
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** Three shapes for planning tooling's long-term home: (A) Pql absorbs planning — `pql decisions …` + `pql ticket …` subcommands; clide shells out. (B) Clide absorbs pql — reverse [D-003](architecture.md), one big Dart tool. (C) Separate new binary just for planning.
|
|
- **Context:** User is leaning (A). This plan assumes (A) without committing. If (A) doesn't land, [D-040](process.md#d-040-python-stopgap-under-toolsscriptsplan)'s sunset condition changes. Gates all tooling work. Integration constraints that shape this question are captured in [D-039](process.md#d-039-planning-tooling-lives-in-pql) / [R-009](rejected.md#r-009-port-planning-tooling-into-clide).
|
|
- **Source:** 2026-04-21 planning.
|
|
|
|
### Q-023: SSH-remote development — run clide against a remote workspace
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** Clide today assumes the workspace, the daemon, and the Flutter UI all run on the same machine. A growing class of users edits on remote systems (build servers, GPU boxes, cloud dev environments). What's the architecture for "open repo on host-B from UI on host-A"? Two shapes: (A) daemon-on-remote — clide's Dart daemon runs on the remote; the app talks to it over an SSH-tunnelled unix socket or a dedicated TCP socket (mTLS?), pty/process/filesystem work stays server-side; local app is pure UI. (B) filesystem-mounted — remote mounted via sshfs/9p/rclone, daemon runs locally against the mount; simpler but every fs op + git call crosses the network, and PTYs get complicated (local shell on remote filesystem? ssh-exec per command?). (A) matches VS Code Remote / JetBrains Gateway; (B) matches nothing load-bearing. Sub-questions either way: auth (ssh-agent? per-project keys? OIDC?), tmux / Claude session persistence semantics (does primary-per-repo re-key on host + repo?), multi-host identity in `.pql/pql.db`, latency tolerance for the event stream, re-sync on disconnect.
|
|
- **Context:** Surfaced 2026-04-22 during Tier-1 planning. Not a Tier 1 concern — terminal + Claude panes land local-first — but the daemon/IPC seam decisions (notably `D-005` and `D-006`) constrain the future answer. Worth scoping before Tier 6 (extension API) so third-party extensions don't accrue assumptions the remote path would have to unwind.
|
|
- **Source:** 2026-04-22 planning (user-raised).
|
|
|
|
### Q-022: Ticket persistence strategy
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** Once [Q-021](#q-021-pql-absorbs-planning-vs-keeps-separate) resolves in favour of (A), how do tickets handle shared team state? (1) Never commit (per-dev, ephemeral — works for solo). (2) Commit on milestone (settled-reach's sprint-close pattern — kanban has no natural equivalent, `release` or `tier-cut` is the closest). (3) Markdown mirror — every mutation writes `tickets/T-NNN.md` alongside SQLite; git-legible authoritative record; DB is rebuildable. (3) is probably the eventual answer.
|
|
- **Context:** Kanban's lack of a sync event breaks settled-reach's SQLite-authoritative approach the moment two devs collaborate.
|
|
- **Source:** 2026-04-21 planning.
|
|
|
|
### Q-025: Body text face — mono everywhere vs Josefin Sans UI + mono code
|
|
- **Status:** Open
|
|
- **Question:** The design handoff uses JetBrains Mono for all UI text (tab labels, file paths, status bar, sidebar labels), reserving Josefin Sans only for display/title text. Our current implementation uses Josefin Sans as the ambient UI face with JetBrains Mono only for code/terminal/diff surfaces. Which direction?
|
|
- **Context:** The design's "mono everywhere" rationale: clide is an IDE for people who like grids. The current Josefin Sans rationale: visual distinction between chrome text and code text, warmer feel. Both are valid — this is a feel decision, not a technical one.
|
|
- **Source:** 2026-04-22 design handoff review.
|
|
|
|
---
|