Record Celebrimbor meta-framework extraction ideas

[clintecker]

What changed

• adds an 814-line extraction notebook for the domain-neutral accumulated-trust machinery emerging from press
• adopts Celebrimbor as the working project and CLI name, with lowercase celebrimbor-* package names
• records an explicit trademark, package-name, and project-name availability gate before public release because the working name comes from Tolkien's legendarium
• distinguishes implemented substrate, scheduled work, and speculative extraction so planned concepts are not mistaken for shipped framework code
• sketches candidate artifact, invariant, proof, receipt, diagnostic, capability, fixture, damage, and projection APIs
• records framework invariants, pytest/plugin behavior, Python artifact integrations, CLI concepts, extraction-readiness gates, a strangler migration, seed backlog, risks, success criteria, and open decisions
• consciously excludes the notebook from the public press site because it is exploration, not a current product contract; site completeness verifies that this exclusion remains intentional

Why

Press is proving broadly reusable software-production ideas, but extracting them too early would risk turning roadmap terminology into an abstraction without implementation scars. This preserves the ideas and defines objective readiness gates while keeping press as the proving ground through the trust-foundation, adversarial-artifact, and accumulated-delivery milestones.

Celebrimbor is a maker-centered working name for a system concerned with the identity, proof, and integrity of things produced. The architecture remains name-neutral so the legal and availability review can still reject or replace the public name without redesigning the framework.

Impact

There is no runtime, packaging, CLI, artifact, or public-site behavior change. The branch establishes a durable starting point for a possible later Python framework without scheduling or authorizing the extraction.

Validation

• conflict, TOML, JSON, large-file, shell, YAML, and Markdown checks pass
• roadmap projection, ruff, mypy, and press selftest pass
• the complete reusable pytest suite passes: 87 tests

One newly landed property test fails only when invoked from inside git commit because the hook exports its in-progress Git index; the same complete suite passes outside that inherited commit environment. This change does not modify that test or publication policy.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@clintecker, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 58 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 0c0eda6d-d64f-404c-895d-cb830c6a9348

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 98818fa and a0b4d78.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• docs/META-FRAMEWORK-EXTRACTION.md
• scripts/build_site.py

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch codex/meta-framework-notes

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR records exploratory design notes for a potential future extraction of press’s “accumulated-trust” / claim-and-evidence machinery into a domain-neutral Python framework, while ensuring those notes are intentionally excluded from the generated public press documentation site.

Changes:

• Added a new extraction notebook (docs/META-FRAMEWORK-EXTRACTION.md) capturing candidate concepts, invariants, interfaces, and readiness gates.
• Updated the docs-site build script to explicitly exclude the notebook from publication, while still enforcing “completeness” via a stated exclusion reason.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
scripts/build_site.py	Adds an explicit NOT_PUBLISHED entry so the new exploration notebook is intentionally excluded without breaking completeness checks.
docs/META-FRAMEWORK-EXTRACTION.md	New long-form exploration notebook describing potential framework extraction concepts, constraints, and sequencing.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[clintecker]

@coderabbitai review

[coderabbitai]

✅ Action performed

Review finished.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.