#4463 运行时发布门在 host-config 拓扑(environmentId 未绑定)上整体不跑——#5086 只把 code-only 拒绝移出了同一条短路

[os-zhuang]

观察到的缺口

ObjectStackProtocolImplementation.assertRuntimeAuthoringRules(packages/metadata-protocol/src/protocol.ts,#4463 的运行时发布门)第一行是:

if (this.environmentId === undefined) return;

这条短路本身是既有设计且正确——它是 ADR-0005「控制面 / 包作者自有通道」的 carve-out,与其下方 #3050 authoring gate 的 if (this.environmentId !== undefined) 同一口径,protocol.runtime-authoring-gate.test.ts 也把它作为刻意行为钉住。本单不是要求撤掉它。

问题在于 environmentId === undefined 并不只意味着控制面内核。#5086 在同一文件里(saveMetaItem 的 code-only 拒绝块注释)留下的原话即是证据:

「…the premise the carve-out rests on ("this kernel is the package author's own bootstrap channel") is simply not true for the CLI's lightweight assembler: a host config with instantiated plugins (isHostConfig → shouldBootWithLibrary === false) boots new ObjectQLPlugin() with NO environmentId, so the flagship showcase — a self-hosted app server whose PUT /api/v1/meta/* is an END-USER surface — ran with this entire gate disengaged.」

#5086 据此把 code-only 类型的拒绝移出了 environmentId 门(「Keying authorization off a row-scoping key is what made a type-level declaration depend on deployment topology; the declaration decides it here instead」),但只移了那一处。#4463 的运行时发布门(共享 AUTHORING_RULES 的 26 条规则)仍留在短路后面。

于是在 host-config 拓扑上,PUT /api/v1/meta/* 这个终端用户面上一条作者时规则都不跑——而 #4463 立单的理由恰恰是「对 Studio 租户 / MCP-AI 作者来说这不是四道门里较弱的一道,而是唯一的一道」。

现状核验(本单只测了这些,未测的如实标出)

已实测:每条常规服务路径都绑定 environmentId,所以它们照常进门——

路径	environmentId	位置
os dev	env_local(默认)	packages/cli/src/commands/dev.ts:225
os start	env_local(默认)	packages/cli/src/commands/start.ts:197
standalone artifact stack	proj_local(默认)	packages/runtime/src/standalone-stack.ts:378
cloud 单项目内核	各自项目 id	packages/objectql/src/plugin.ts:295

未实测:host-config 拓扑今天是否仍会走到无 environmentId 的装配。仓内有两处形状可疑——packages/cli/src/commands/serve.ts:1000 的 config.objects && !hasObjectQL 自动注册分支(new ObjectQLPlugin(),无 environmentId),以及任何 objectstack.config.ts 里手写 plugins: [new ObjectQLPlugin()] 的 host。上面引的注释是 #5086 当时的测量,不是我这轮的复测。定级前应先复现这一条:若该拓扑已随其它改动消失,本单可直接关掉;若仍在,则是一个终端用户面上的门整体失效。

为什么单独立单

发现于 #6285(PR #6708)。该单的 dispatch 明确要求「若短路使护栏在关键部署形态不可达,STOP 上报,⛔ 不得擅自拓宽 gate 激活面」。核验结论是本护栏可达(多组织部署都在上表的路径上),所以 #6285 按裁决正常落地、未动激活面。但拓宽与否会同时改变全部 26 条共享规则的影响面,是独立的契约决定,不该搭在一个护栏单里顺手做。

可能的方向(不预判,留给分诊/维护者)

1. 照 metadata: allowRuntimeCreate:false is not enforced — PUT /meta creates job and agent items the registry declares code-only #5086 的思路,把门的激活从 environmentId(一个行作用域键)改为按拓扑/来源判定,让「包作者自有通道」这个真实意图有一个自己的表达,而不是借用 environmentId;
2. 维持现状,但把「host-config 拓扑无 environmentId」本身当缺陷修掉(让该装配也绑一个 environmentId),这样短路的前提重新成立;
3. 若复现不出该拓扑,关单。

Refs:#4463(门的立单与四项裁决)、#5086(同一前提的上一次修补,只移了 code-only 一处)、#6285 / PR #6708(本次核验的来处)、#6602(同族:另一处只按 environmentId 而不按 org 把关的 seam)。

---

Generated by Claude Code

[os-zhuang]

Triage: needs-user-decision + domain:metadata + target:v17.

• Anchors re-verified on origin/main @ cfeb9a0: packages/metadata-protocol/src/protocol.ts:2426 — assertRuntimeAuthoringRules still opens with the environmentId === undefined early return; packages/cli/src/commands/serve.ts auto-register branch still boots new ObjectQLPlugin() with no environmentId (the suspect topology's in-repo producer). Premise live.
• Why decision-box, not queue: widening the gate's activation changes enforcement for all 26 shared AUTHORING_RULES on an end-user surface — and the [转移] 发布期护栏:多组织下「平台级 + schedule + create_record + 未显式 organization_id」拒绝——#6155 Q3=A 裁决的 lint 半边 #6285 dispatch already reserved exactly this call ("STOP and escalate, do not widen the gate's activation surface unilaterally"). The fork the maintainer owns: (1) re-key activation from environmentId to topology/source per the metadata: allowRuntimeCreate:false is not enforced — PUT /meta creates job and agent items the registry declares code-only #5086 pattern, (2) make host-config assemblies bind an environmentId so the carve-out's premise holds again, or (3) close if the topology no longer reproduces. The factual repro (does a host config still assemble without environmentId?) is the first step of whichever execution card follows the ruling — the in-repo producer above suggests it still does, but that is one hop short of a boot-level repro.
• Release board: target:v17 on ground ② — on the affected topology the [runtime/metadata] 作者时规则只存在于 CLI:Studio/REST/MCP 的运行时授权面是第四扇门,26 条规则一条不跑——#4409 修完后最大的敞口 #4463 gate, described at its own filing as the ONLY authoring gate for Studio/MCP authors, runs zero of its rules on the end-user PUT /api/v1/meta/* surface. If the repro shows the topology is gone, pull the tag together with option 3.
• Dedup: repo-scoped assertRuntimeAuthoringRules search — only [转移] 发布期护栏:多组织下「平台级 + schedule + create_record + 未显式 organization_id」拒绝——#6155 Q3=A 裁决的 lint 半边 #6285 (the verification source, correctly landed without touching activation) and this card. metadata: allowRuntimeCreate:false is not enforced — PUT /meta creates job and agent items the registry declares code-only #5086 (closed) fixed the code-only slice only; An org-scoped overlay row reaches the process-wide SchemaRegistry on unscoped kernels — both the write-through and the read hydration gate only on environmentId, never on org #6602 is the org-axis sibling, different key. Clean.

本评论来自分诊座位 Routine（#5474 试点），不构成认领。

---

Generated by Claude Code

[os-zhuang]

Maintainer ruling (2026-08-08): conditional ruling — premise first, then direction 1 (Option A).

Premise (falsifiable — verify before implementing): the host-config topology still assembles without environmentId. A boot-level reproduction on current origin/main is the dispatch's first deliverable (the serve.ts auto-registration branch is the suspected in-repo producer). If the premise is falsified — the topology no longer exists — report the fork and close per direction 3; do not force the implementation, and do not silently fall back to another option.

If the premise holds: Option A — re-key the gate's activation from the environmentId proxy to an explicit topology/origin judgment, extending the #5086 pattern, so the package-author own-channel carve-out gets its own expression. The 26 rules' test posture migrates with it.

Rationale (three-axis review):

• Business: if reproduced, an end-user-facing PUT /api/v1/meta/* surface runs zero of the 26 authoring rules on that topology — the v17 tag is earned.
• Long-term: environmentId-undefined is a proxy key for "control plane", and this card is itself the proof that proxy keys lie. Direction 2 would re-prop the proxy, and every future assembly variant reopens the hole; A writes the semantic down once.
• AI-error containment: the 26 authoring rules are the primary anti-AI-error surface; a topology that silently skips them all is the largest single hole.

target:v17 stays while the premise stands; if the reproduction falsifies it, the closure takes the tag with it.

State: needs-user-decision removed; pm:queue added — metadata lane.

Maintainer directive (verbatim, covering this batch of 6 inbox cards): 「接受你的建议」. Recorded by PM session session_01JaVVMrSxt7Tgi1uwEuDtH7.

---

Generated by Claude Code