docs: lockstep cleanup — drop fallow yardstick from remaining surfaces#64
Conversation
…remaining surfaces Audit of remaining `[Ff]allow` references after PRs #58, #61, #62 landed found 4 surfaces still treating fallow as a positioning peer (off-mission under the cohort framing locked in by PR #58): CLEANED UP: - docs/why-codemap.md:23 — non-goal parenthetical "(those are different products — e.g. fallow, knip, jscpd)" still elevated fallow as the primary static-analysis exemplar. Mirrors the PR #62 roadmap.md fix (lockstep per docs/README.md Single source of truth — non-goals canonical home is roadmap.md; consumer-facing framing in why-codemap.md must follow). Now: "(those are different products — e.g. knip, jscpd)". - docs/glossary.md:36 (audit definition) — "Distinct from `fallow audit` (that runs code-quality verdicts...)" singled out fallow as the comparator. Generalized to "Distinct from code-quality audit tools (e.g. knip for unused exports, jscpd for duplication, framework- specific complexity linters)". Same product-class point; no peer yardstick. - .agents/rules/docs-governance.md:36 — "(fallow, future plugins)" as the canonical example of repo-wide tool adoption was stale (fallow.md closed in PR #61). Updated to "(oxlint, future plugins)" + added a closure-precedent note pointing at fallow.md's status header and non-goals-reassessment-2026-05.md for current positioning. - .agents/skills/docs-governance/SKILL.md:86,88,136 — same staleness: "fallow" as ongoing-tracker example was stale; "fallow audit" in the re-derivable test list. Updated to oxlint + generic "static-analysis tooling"; preserved the fallow.md cross-ref as the CLOSED precedent (research notes that close with status header when peer framing goes off-mission). LEFT ALONE (legitimate): - docs/why-codemap.md:110-121 (comparison table) — different-product- classes consumer framing (Codemap vs fallow vs Aider RepoMap vs LSP). Not a peer yardstick under the cohort positioning; "agents can use Codemap AND fallow AND LSP" framing is honest about distinct slots. - docs/research/fallow.md (closed historical) — body preserved per PR #61. - docs/research/competitive-scan-2026-04.md (closed historical scan). - .agents/lessons.md:16 — "Never commit absolute local user paths" lesson with PR #58 historical context referencing the fallow clone path. Historical record; preserve. - .agents/skills/audit-pr-architecture/SKILL.md (5 mentions) — recommends `bunx fallow audit` as a static-analysis TOOL during PR audits. Different-product-class tool recommendation, not positioning. Borderline; left alone for now (could be genericized later as a separate concern). Net effect: every remaining `[Ff]allow` reference in the repo is either historical (closed research, lessons) or a different-product- class acknowledgement (consumer comparison table, static-analysis tool usage). Zero peer-yardstick framing remains in the load-bearing positioning surfaces.
|
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded
To keep reviews running without waiting, you can enable usage-based add-on for your organization. This allows additional reviews beyond the hourly cap. Account admins can enable it under billing. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. ℹ️ Review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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. Review rate limit: 0/1 reviews remaining, refill in 16 minutes and 5 seconds.Comment |
1 participant
Summary
Lockstep cleanup catching every remaining
[Ff]allowpositioning-yardstick reference after PR #58, PR #61, PR #62 landed. Final pass to make the repo's positioning posture self-consistent.Audit findings
Searched
[Ff]allowrepo-wide; categorized each hit:docs/why-codemap.md:23docs/glossary.md:36(auditdef)fallow auditas comparator.agents/rules/docs-governance.md:36.agents/skills/docs-governance/SKILL.md:86,88,136docs/why-codemap.md:110-121(comparison table)docs/research/fallow.mddocs/research/competitive-scan-2026-04.md.agents/lessons.md:16.agents/skills/audit-pr-architecture/SKILL.md(5 mentions)fallow auditas a static-analysis tool (different product class); not positioningWhat's cleaned
docs/why-codemap.md— dropfallowfrom the static-analyzer non-goal parenthetical →(e.g. knip, jscpd). Mirrors PR #62'sroadmap.mdfix per the doc-governance Single source of truth lockstep discipline.docs/glossary.md— generalizeauditdefinition fromDistinct fromfallow audit`` →Distinct from code-quality audit tools (e.g. knip for unused exports, jscpd for duplication, framework-specific complexity linters). Same product-class point; no peer yardstick..agents/rules/docs-governance.md— update Tier-2 priming rule's canonical example fromfallow, future plugins→oxlint, future plugins+ add closure-precedent note pointing atfallow.md's status header for the closed-research pattern..agents/skills/docs-governance/SKILL.md— same staleness fix on the deep reference; preservefallow.mdcross-ref as the closed precedent (closed-research-with-status-header pattern when peer framing goes off-mission). Re-derivable-test wording generalized from "fallow" → "static-analysis tooling".Doc-governance compliance
rg "Rule [0-9]+" docs/andrg "<doc-path>(#[a-z-]+)?"before slimming; no cited rule numbers / section anchors broken.roadmap.md;why-codemap.mdparenthetical was the lagging consumer-facing copy.fallow.mdcross-refs reframed to point at it as the closed precedent, not the ongoing tracker. Future doc-governance readers see the right pattern.Test plan
bun run format:checkpasses on all 4 filesrg "[Ff]allow" .shows only legitimate (historical / different-product-class) references remainnon-goals-reassessment-2026-05.mdandfallow.mdresolveOut of scope (intentional)
.agents/skills/audit-pr-architecture/SKILL.mdreferences tobunx fallow audit— recommends fallow as a static-analysis tool (different product class), not a positioning peer. Could be genericized to "any static-analysis-on-PR tool" later if desired; not blocking.docs/why-codemap.mdcomparison table — different-product-classes consumer framing remains valid under the cohort positioning ("agents can use Codemap AND fallow AND an LSP").