Skip to content

docs: scope M9-T08 revoke safety slice#91

Merged
skel84 merged 2 commits intomainfrom
issue-85-m9-revoke-safety
Mar 19, 2026
Merged

docs: scope M9-T08 revoke safety slice#91
skel84 merged 2 commits intomainfrom
issue-85-m9-revoke-safety

Conversation

@skel84
Copy link
Owner

@skel84 skel84 commented Mar 19, 2026

Summary

  • add a planning note for M9-T08 / #85 that narrows the revoke/reclaim implementation slice
  • sync the docs index and status snapshot so the repo points at the active revoke-safety planning work
  • tighten the slice boundary so T08 still preserves the existing crash/retry/failover contract without silently absorbing broader T09/T10 cleanup

Validation

  • git diff --check -- docs/revoke-safety-slice.md docs/status.md docs/design.md docs/README.md
  • ./scripts/check_repo.sh
  • ./scripts/preflight.sh

Refs #85

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 19, 2026

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 4c832d24-3cc6-4af1-9834-7d238a42830d

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 42013c5 and b3184c0.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • docs/README.md
  • docs/design.md
  • docs/revoke-safety-slice.md
  • docs/status.md

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

  • Documentation
    • Added comprehensive documentation for revoke and reclaim functionality, including implementation scope, semantics, safety invariants, and test coverage requirements.
    • Updated documentation index and project status tracking to reflect current development progress and planned next steps.

Walkthrough

This PR adds documentation for the M9-T08 implementation slice covering revoke and reclaim behavior in a lease-kernel system. A new design document (revoke-safety-slice.md) specifies the scope, success/failure semantics, safety invariants, and test requirements for this slice. Documentation index entries in README and design map are updated, and milestone tracking in status.md is advanced from T07 to T08.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Documentation Index Updates
docs/README.md, docs/design.md
Added navigation links to the new revoke-safety-slice.md design document in both the engineering docs reading list and the document map.
Design Specification
docs/revoke-safety-slice.md
New file defining M9-T08 implementation slice scope: revoke(lease_id) and reclaim(lease_id) core commands, deterministic error semantics with cached duplicate behavior, safety invariants for late-not-early reuse, required executor/persistence/replay plumbing, and comprehensive test checklist with exit conditions.
Milestone Tracking
docs/status.md
Updated M9 progress: advanced from T07 (merged) to T08 (in-progress planning branch); added fencing slice coverage details; changed #80 authoritative-docs status from active to merged; replaced #84/M9-T07 with PR #90/M9-T07 in current focus; specified T08 narrowed scope vs. deferred WAL/snapshot/replication work; updated next planned slice targets to M9-T09/T10/T11.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~15 minutes

Possibly related PRs

  • PR #81: The revoke-safety-slice additions directly narrow and extend the M9 lease-kernel planning introduced in that PR's docs freeze.
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch issue-85-m9-revoke-safety
📝 Coding Plan
  • Generate coding plan for human review comments

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@skel84
Copy link
Owner Author

skel84 commented Mar 19, 2026

@coderabbitai summary

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 19, 2026

✅ Actions performed

Summary regeneration triggered.

@skel84 skel84 merged commit 1ccad80 into main Mar 19, 2026
3 checks passed
@skel84 skel84 deleted the issue-85-m9-revoke-safety branch March 19, 2026 14:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant