Files
clide/governance
jpmschweitzerandClaude Opus 4.8 44a4c5d528 re-scope T-36 to live-sync read-mirror; amend D-50; add interaction-model epic T-259
T-36 bundled four D-50 clauses; the give-clide-hands push (T-208)
superseded three of them. The agent now drives the reader explicitly via
`clide ui open markdown <path>` (T-231) and ui.open->diff (T-233) instead
of clide parsing Claude's terminal output, so the auto-swap (clause 2)
and collapsed-spine badge (clause 3) are obsolete. Clauses 1 and 5
already hold. The one piece give-clide-hands did not deliver is the
live-sync read-mirror (clause 4).

- Amend D-50: record clauses 2/3 superseded by the agent-driven ui.open
  verb; live-sync remains the UI-owned piece.
- Re-scope T-36 to just the live-sync read-mirror, drop the spine badge,
  move back to backlog.
- Re-home T-36 from T-7 (Tier 5 canvas/graph, a mis-parent) to new
  epic T-259 (interaction model — D-47..D-57 surface).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-06 23:21:02 +02:00
..

Decisions, Questions, Rejected

This directory holds structured planning records that pql parses into pql.db. Each record is a ### [DQR]-N: Title heading inside a markdown file. Files live in three per-type subdirectories:

  • decisions/<domain>.md — confirmed design decisions
  • questions/<domain>.md — open questions that may resolve into decisions or rejected proposals
  • rejected/<domain>.md — rejected proposals (kept for the audit trail)

The parser infers domain from the filename stem and record type from the parent subdirectory.

D-records that propose implementation work link to initiative-type tickets via decision_ref. Run pql decisions show <id> --with-tickets to inspect implementation status.

Start with this canonical set; create files as records land in each domain:

  • architecture — structural commitments (storage, layering, languages, libraries)
  • process — team workflow (commits, branches, releases, reviews)
  • design — user-facing surface (UX, UI, public APIs)
  • coding-conventions — team-internal code shape (style, lint, file layout)
  • testing — quality strategy (coverage, layers, gates)

You might also want, project-permitting:

  • accessibility — if you ship user-facing software
  • security — if you handle user data or network surfaces
  • licensing — if you release open-source or commercial
  • documentation — if user-docs are non-trivial
  • deployment — if shipping is non-trivial
  • performance — if you have perf budgets / SLOs

Decisions

Open questions

Resolved questions

Rejected