Skip to content

docs(0.2): multi-repo alignment example fixture (Track 6.4)#152

Open
pmclSF wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
feat/0.2-track6-multirepo-example
Open

docs(0.2): multi-repo alignment example fixture (Track 6.4)#152
pmclSF wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
feat/0.2-track6-multirepo-example

Conversation

@pmclSF
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@pmclSF pmclSF commented May 3, 2026

Summary

Adds the canonical 3-repo convergence example for the Align pillar:
docs/examples/align/multirepo/. Companion to the Track 6.1
manifest format (PR #148) and the alignment-first migration framing.

The example documents the contract Acme Corp would see using the
multi-repo manifest + aggregator: declare three services, see
drift from the framework of record, get an alignment-first
recommended convergence sequence.

Why illustrative, not runnable

The cross-repo aggregator is Track 6.2/6.3 (0.2.x work). The
manifest format ships in 0.2.0 (PR #148). This example is the
bridge: the README documents the shape of expected output so:

  • The contract is locked before the implementation chases it
  • Adopters who hand-write a repos.yaml today learn the file
    format 0.2.x will consume unchanged
  • The alignment-first vs health-first sequencing rule is
    documented up front, not a runtime detail

Files

  • docs/examples/align/multirepo/README.md — full convergence
    story + expected aggregator output
  • docs/examples/align/multirepo/.terrain/repos.yaml — runnable
    manifest matching the story
  • docs/examples/align/multirepo/snapshots/README.md — notes
    on the snapshotPath: future-expansion path

Test plan

  • make docs-verify clean
  • go test ./internal/portfolio/... clean

Plan tracker

Closes Track 6.4. Track 6 remaining: 6.2 + 6.3 (cross-repo
aggregator) + 6.7 (conversion-corpus calibration to A-grade) —
all 0.2.x work per the partial-ship-OK posture.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Adds the canonical 3-repo convergence example for the Align pillar:
docs/examples/align/multirepo/. Companion to the Track 6.1 manifest
format (in PR #148) and the alignment-first migration framing
(also #148).

The example walks through Acme Corp's three Node services on
partially-divergent test stacks, declaring a portfolio manifest,
and the convergence sequence the cross-repo aggregator will
recommend when it lands in 0.2.x. Until the aggregator binary
ships, the example is illustrative — the README documents the
*shape* of the expected output so:
  - the contract is locked before the implementation chases it
  - adopters who hand-write a repos.yaml today learn the file
    format that 0.2.x will consume unchanged
  - the alignment-first vs health-first sequencing rule is
    documented as the contract, not a runtime detail

Files:
  - README.md          full convergence story + expected output shape
  - .terrain/repos.yaml  runnable manifest matching the story
  - snapshots/README.md  notes on snapshotPath: future expansion

Status posture matches the parity plan: Track 6 is parallel and
partial-ship-OK in 0.2.0; Align is the secondary pillar; multi-
repo is explicitly Tier 3 / experimental until 0.2.x ships the
aggregator. This example is the bridge that locks the contract
between today's manifest format and tomorrow's binary output.

Verification: make docs-verify clean.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented May 3, 2026

[INFO] Terrain — Informational only

Insufficient data to assess change risk confidently.

Metric Value
Changed files 3 (0 source · 0 test)

Limitations
  • No coverage artifacts provided; protection gaps reflect missing data, not measured absence. Provide --coverage to improve accuracy.
  • Mixed test cultures reduce cross-framework optimization confidence. Consider standardizing on fewer frameworks.

Generated by Terrain · terrain pr --json for machine-readable output

Targeted Test Results

No tests selected — change affects only non-code files.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented May 3, 2026

Terrain AI Risk Review

Metric Value
AI surfaces 13
Eval scenarios 16
Impacted scenarios 0
Uncovered surfaces 13

Decision: PASS — AI surfaces are covered.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant