Decision needed: which repos are operational, which are clinical (C1 / G1 / D1 / M1)

[obotclaw[bot]]

Open question: your operational-vs-clinical principle (recorded in #155) keys on a per-repo classification you haven't enumerated. Five repos are clear and are recorded; three are your call. Full argument: decision artifact.

Recorded as clear: obot.agent + obot.roadmap operational; safety.viz, gsm.safety, safety-histogram clinical.

C1 — open.csr: clinical (recommended) or operational? It builds Clinical Study Reports; operational would ship the live app unreviewed.

G1 — open.gismo: clinical (recommended) or operational? RBQM analytics platform; operational would run the v1.0 arc to main without your review.

D1 — demo-301: operational (recommended) or clinical? Synthetic-data demo already living the operational shape; site stays an attested release either way.

M1 — where it lives: a "class" field per repo in policy.json (recommended — the file every merge consults, inside its own carve-out), vs a prose doc that enforces nothing.

Precondition, stated plainly: auto-merge-to-prod requires CI. obot.agent had none; obot.agent#98 adds the 112-test suite + policy validator, and its first run already caught a real macOS-only test assumption.

Recommendation: C1 + G1 clinical, D1 operational, M1 in policy.json — which changes no merge mechanics anywhere today; it writes down intent before latitude widens.

Nothing is blocked while you decide: no class field is written until you answer, and every repo keeps exactly its current policy.

---

This post was drafted by Claude Code using Fable 5 (👯🤖 gov sibling session) and awaits @jwildfire's decision.

[obotclaw[bot]]

Decision recorded — @jwildfire, 2026-08-15, via 🎩🤖 obot-prime. Verbatim:

reviewing https://jwildfire.github.io/obot.roadmap/reports/decisions/2026-08-15-operational-clinical-classification/ lets delete the safety-histogram fork completely. I think i want to call demo-301 clinical for now, though we might want to switch it later. Right now that is the place where i am reviewing app functionality, so i want to make sure content is reviewed thoroughly before updates are made. if it ends up being a simple template where no user-facing changes are being made, we can convert it to operational later. agree with the rest of the recs.

Resolved: D0009.1 (C1) open.csr clinical · D0009.2 (G1) open.gismo clinical · D0009.3 (D1) demo-301 clinical, his override — reclassification condition recorded: converts to operational if it becomes a simple template with no user-facing changes · D0009.4 (M1) class field in policy.json approved.

Implemented same day (obot.agent#108, merged): every repo entry carries class: operational | clinical; obot-policy explain/matrix print it and validate warns when it is missing; demo-301's switch condition is written into its policy entry; rc-framework and the live rosters updated. No merge lane changed anywhere — the policy already behaved this way; the intent is now recorded and machine-readable.

safety-histogram (his added call): verified first — the renderer, its tests, requirement matrix, live gallery demo, evidence page and API reference all exist in safety.viz; the upstream RhoInc history still exists upstream. A full 42-ref git bundle was saved to the workspace archive, then the repo was archived (reversible). Deletion is held at the verification gate: the fork's P004 pilot commit history and evidence branches exist nowhere else on GitHub, and no agent token can delete a repo anyway — the full pre-deletion findings are in the session report, and the final delete is one click in the repo's settings if he confirms with those findings in front of him.

---

This comment was drafted by Claude Code using Fable 5 (👯🤖 gov sibling session), recording @jwildfire's decision verbatim.