Docs Council Execution Releases P0 Pc 001 Readiness Hardening Planning Review

Canonical source: docs/council/execution/releases/P0-PC-001-READINESS-HARDENING-PLANNING-REVIEW.md · Snapshot commit: 6b8b70b72148

PC-001 readiness-control hardening — planning review

• Task: PC-001 / issue #3
• Review date: 2026-08-15 IST
• Reviewed revision: d44dbfbc8d040baddf46b7288476d4dc53c81e8c
• Canonical dossier digest: sha256:32deebe971b1321a7ccd4203d4c861d93c4ec3d45ba3bf4c9fab2ea048b9eaed
• Disposition: Accepted planning scope; merge Gate A before any control-code edit
• Execution allowed: false
• Evidence boundary: this is candidate-bound planning approval, not executed test evidence or task Ready status. It authorizes only later local/public control hardening after the planning PR merges.

Reviewed packet

Discipline	Path	SHA-256
Product	docs/work-items/PC-001/P0-PC-001-PRD.md	68ab74c94226a4ee650d1cb89929abe85941bdef3acabac50fa846e048f23f27
Architecture	docs/work-items/PC-001/P0-PC-001-TECHNICAL-PLAN.md	43367fff28fa07042de795c6a90af7cbe4c9a3721d1e797c20fbbf257ffacfcf
Design	docs/work-items/PC-001/P0-PC-001-DESIGN-SPEC.md	5f5343a528313f000b0b22ea9c02aa3d17e449b84ad7c5fed3e84999debb09e2
QA	docs/work-items/PC-001/P0-PC-001-QA-PLAN.md	c7a8f4c346e3715f8ea015fcb9f96a07b3327d68b38e7e9b18115e3c167e5bfb
Delivery	docs/work-items/PC-001/P0-PC-001-DELIVERY-CHECKLIST.md	ddd11117218c3c65428e4743b62d7677c1f90d024b3b7817f5bbc6788f4c5b8d
Council	docs/work-items/PC-001/P0-PC-001-COUNCIL-READINESS.md	b01136fe1979d079157a8cedfbfcdb4d361a18016e9d7b2b9bbeedc1c726a1ff

The digest is sha256(JSON.stringify({taskId, revision, artifacts})), where taskId is PC-001 and artifact keys are inserted in canonical order: product, architecture, design, qa, delivery, council. Each artifact value contains path followed by sha256.

Five-seat attestations

Seat	Verdict	Candidate-bound evidence reference	Decisive rationale
Product Manager	Approve planning scope	codex-agent:pc001-plan-product-r3-20260815	Ten corrective requirements remain measurable, and the revised determinism boundary distinguishes byte-stable controls from semantically/render-equivalent workbook packaging.
UI/UX Designer	Approve planning scope	codex-agent:pc001-plan-design-r3-20260815	Operator evidence, three journeys, exact labels/states, accessibility, the existing 17-field mapping, and all 20 workbook render checks remain coherent.
Technical Architect	Approve planning scope	codex-agent:pc001-plan-architecture-r3-20260815	Fail-closed derivation, candidate/publication/activation split, identity/action/authority schemas, protected refresh, rollback, and the artifact-specific determinism boundary are implementable and bounded.
Independent QA	Approve planning scope	codex-agent:pc001-plan-qa-r3-20260815	Same-build workbook hash equality and cross-build semantic/render equivalence are independently testable; the current workbook remains on a separate visual HOLD until repaired. No test execution is claimed.
Project Manager	Approve planning scope	codex-agent:pc001-plan-project-r3-20260815	Existing issue #3 remains the sole tracker; the two-PR gate, exact-main sync, 17-value parity, workbook/Wiki/log reconciliation, and two-snapshot verification preserve status truth.

All five reviewers independently matched the six artifact hashes and canonical digest. No planning-scope veto remains. The primary implementation integrator did not substitute for a specialist seat; the QA reviewer did not author the packet or implementation-test evidence.

Review history and repairs

The first candidate, 7d64fa1a54a37e056c1e0f9f34dba0c48cc0f4d1, was not accepted. Design held it because machine Design coverage remained pending/unmapped, QA named an obsolete 348 Draft live oracle although the packet contained six In-review artifacts, and the existing 17 Project values lacked an exact evidence-to-field mapping. Candidate 8bbd52d… resolved those findings and received five-seat approval, but a subsequent independent workbook build showed that packaging-only OOXML relationship IDs can change while the workbook remains semantically identical. That finding invalidated R2. Candidate d44dbfb… replaced the overbroad byte-determinism claim with exact same-build published-copy hashes plus exhaustive cross-build semantic and 20-render equivalence; every earlier disposition was superseded and all five seats re-reviewed the R3 hashes.

Before the first review completed, the integrator also reported a noncanonical provisional digest created with filenames rather than artifact-kind keys. Reviewers rejected that value, the canonical serialization was made explicit, and no approval bound the discarded digest. This record contains only the independently recomputed canonical digest for the accepted candidate.

The planning packet defines how the workbook defect must be verified; it does not accept the current workbook. Independent visual QA still holds the generated workbook for clipped Requirement Map rows, unreadably small task-detail continuation renders, missing repeated title/header context, and an unexplained title-less Review Guide preview. Those defects must be repaired and the full PC-001-CTL-R02 workbook matrix must pass before evidence handoff.

Verified candidate state

• Static execution-control validation passed at the reviewed commit.
• Requirements remain 78 total, 71 active, and the exact seven deferred.
• Tasks remain 58 total, 55 P0/R0–R9 and three R10; statuses remain 40 Backlog / 4 Next / 1 In progress / 13 Done.
• All 58 dossiers remain Incomplete, zero are Ready, and zero have executionAllowed=true.
• Artifact states are exactly 342 Draft, six In-review, and zero Approved/Blocked/Not-applicable.
• Proposed PC-001 Design coverage is mapped while all central artifact reviews and seat verdicts remain Hold.
• Deployment remains Unknown — private read authority pending; authentic-media access remains false.

Accepted code-start gate

Local/public readiness-control implementation may begin only after:

1. this review record and the unchanged six reviewed artifacts merge through a normal planning PR;
2. issue #3 resolves to the merged six artifacts and this evidence record;
3. the merged exact-main checkout passes structural validation with executionAllowed=false;
4. no status, issue-count, Project field/view/workflow, private, authentic, R0, deployment, or release mutation is needed; and
5. the implementation starts from the exact merged planning source on a separate branch/PR.

The implementation candidate must receive fresh Independent QA execution of PC-001-CTL-P01, P02, N01..N07, R01, R02, and S01, followed by all five exact-candidate Council seats. Any changed reviewed artifact invalidates this planning approval.

Excluded authority

This record does not make PC-001 or any R0 task Ready, does not change issue #3's historical Done meaning, and does not authorize private-system access, credentials, authentic content/media, application/prototype work, deployment, restore, release, production, a 59th issue, or a Project workflow mutation. P0-OA-001 remains mandatory before every private R0 read.