jpmschweitzer/clide
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
ae1c3d8a3471d20e20ca27532992e92ab3fedca0
clide/decisions/questions-architecture.md
T
jpmschweitzerandClaude 50d9e00ea5 add shared pane widgets + Q-023 ssh-remote question 
ClidePtyView is a theme-bound wrapper around xterm.dart's TerminalView
— token-derived TerminalTheme, JetBrainsMono as the face, Semantics
live-region label so screen readers + Playwright both hear it. The
consumer (terminal / Claude extensions) owns the `Terminal` model and
wires IPC pane.write / pane.output → terminal.write() themselves; the
widget deliberately has no IPC dependency so it stays trivially
testable.

ClidePaneChrome is the shared pane header — title + subtitle + leading
icon + trailing widgets + optional close button. The close button is
null-conditional so primary Claude panes (D-041, landing in step 7)
can render without one.

xterm 4.0.0 added as a justified runtime dep + logged in
licenses.yaml per D-042. 3 new widget tests cover header rendering,
close-button presence, and the close-tap round-trip.

Q-023 records the SSH-remote-development question so the daemon + IPC
seams don't accrete local-only assumptions during Tier 1-5.

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-22 09:19:24 +02:00

6.2 KiB
Raw Blame History

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).

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).

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).

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'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, 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's sunset condition changes. Gates all tooling work. Integration constraints that shape this question are captured in D-039 / R-009.
  • 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 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.
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink