Files
clide/governance
jpmschweitzerandClaude Opus 4.8 89b7f99a8d build(ci): make dugite-check — track dugite-native upstream for security (T-88)
D-59 requires tracking dugite-native (bundled git) releases for security
updates, but it lived only in the D-record prose with no mechanism (clean-house
flagged RULE-SUNSET-WITHOUT-TICKET). Add ci/check_dugite_version.sh + a
`make dugite-check` target: compares the Makefile DUGITE_VERSION pin against the
latest desktop/dugite-native release and loudly flags CVE / security mentions in
the notes. Informational (not a push gate) — the bump itself is manual per D-63
and automated by T-25.

The script header is the maintenance home (dugite is fetched, not built, and
native/dugite/ is gitignored, so there's no BUILD.md to record it): cadence
(quarterly / on a git CVE), advisory subscriptions, and the bump procedure.
D-59's cost line + a Makefile comment now point at the mechanism. T-88 stays
open as the recurring calendar; first check (2026-06-28) shows v2.53.0-3 current.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-28 15:12:50 +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