docs(launch): the pre-launch gate and the announcement plan (#291) - #328
Merged
Conversation
…e-linked, honest-numbered (#291)
…the draft, drift-proof pins
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What & why
Closes #291 (with #320, the scans half, already merged).
docs/launch.mdis the gate the issue asks for — nothing is announced until every box below is ticked — with every box ticked and evidence-linked: Phase 6 (licence/discoverability/positioning), Phase 7 (README, CONTRIBUTING, CoC, templates, Discussions, good-first-issues), the fiqh basis (#317), the review-path stance (#318), the Arabic entry point (#319), CI green on main, the tokenless scans actually configured (#320), and the maintainer-response commitment stated in CONTRIBUTING.md. Below the gate: the audience in the issue's order (Islamic fintech practitioner networks → r/islamicfinance + Muslim dev communities → IIUM/INCEIF/Durham → only then HN/Reddit/Lobsters), what the announcement must say — the measured result in the post, with the real numbers — and a ready-to-adapt draft. Plus the explicit non-goal (not for stars).Two corrections of the issue's own text, made in the document: the measured result is 0 of 90 and 0 of 82 under production-faithful execution (the "0 of 20" in the issue misremembers the earlier 0-of-19 hourly record), and the scans item is satisfied tokenless (#320) rather than by waiting for SONAR_TOKEN/SNYK_TOKEN. One gate item needed a repo change: CONTRIBUTING.md now carries an honest-for-one-person response commitment (triage 3 days, first PR review a week, security routed to SECURITY.md's SLA).
The announcement itself is deliberately NOT part of this PR — the gate arms it; walking through the door is a human action.
Tests-first evidence
tests/test_launch_gate.pywritten first: red 8/8 (no doc). Green: 8 passed — pinning the gate rule verbatim, each gate item named, the real numbers + the record link (path-aware: the doc lives in docs/, the link is doc-relative) + file existence, the audience ORDER by position, the non-goal, the draft's load-bearing content (compliance-engine lead, 0 of 90, not a fatwa engine, No scholarly review), CONTRIBUTING's solo-maintainer commitment, and the README documentation-map link.Gates
uv run ruff check keel tests packages— All checks passed!uv run mypy— Success: no issues found in 237 source filesuv run pytest -q— 2856 passed, 1 skippedScope check