You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
OpenSpec treats changes as first-class artifacts. We just published boulder-evidence-format v0: signed approval receipts binding a plan to digests before any execution. Would an export/import adapter fit OpenSpec's archive flow, or do you deliberately keep evidence out of scope?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
OpenSpec treats changes as first-class artifacts. We just published boulder-evidence-format v0: signed approval receipts binding a plan to digests before any execution. Would an export/import adapter fit OpenSpec's archive flow, or do you deliberately keep evidence out of scope?
Spec (2 pages): https://github.com/min9lin9/boulder/blob/v0.1.17/spec/evidence-format/SPEC.md
Happy to adapt - one line on what would make this not worth adopting is genuinely welcome.
All reactions