Work has been starting from a chat message and a plan file, so two
people could pick up the same thing and neither could see the other.
The tracker is where that is visible.
Search before starting, claim before the first edit -- not before the
commit, since the point is that the other person can see the work is
taken while it is being done. If no issue covers it, open one first:
that is what makes the tracker a description of the project rather than
a description of the past.
The conventions were already right and are written down rather than
reinvented -- the Kind/Area/Priority/Platform/Reviewed/Status taxonomy,
its exclusive scopes, #73 as the roadmap, real Gitea dependencies for
hard blockers, and PR #83's body shape.
What #83 also demonstrated is that a Closes list closes nothing
reliably: it listed ten and five of them sat open in main for a
fortnight. So closing is a step you take and verify, not a keyword you
trust.
.planning/ stops being a queue and keeps design documents and measured
history -- NOTES.md, the audits, the completed plans and the arguments
in them. plans/pending/ is gone, because a plan nobody is executing is
an issue; everything unimplemented in it is now #85-#91, and each
completed plan says which issue carries its remainder. autotag.md is
kept as a historical record, marked stale where the scoring overhaul
overtook it.
The commit grammar is unchanged and is load-bearing for a different
reason, so the issue number lives in the branch name and the PR body
rather than the commit subject.
Refs #92
`.planning/audits/2026-08-11-ui/` is the pass this work came from: the
app driven by hand headless plus three static reviews, ~118 findings
that are really five problems, each spread by being copied rather than
fixed. `.planning/plans/active/007-ui-reconciliation.md` sequences them
by blast radius and records what each of the six passes actually
shipped — including twenty-five entries under "where the plan was
wrong", which is the point of writing it down.
The discipline those entries add up to, now in NOTES.md: a finding is
three hypotheses — how big it is, why it is that big, and what to do
about it — and they can be independently right and wrong. Three of the
audit's recommended fixes would have shipped a bug (`m1` stops the
card grids repainting, `m6`'s index-ordered selection goes stale on
any re-sort, `m5`'s guard leaves the marquee short), all three because
they reasoned from the shape of the code and not from what the rest of
the file already knew about it. Five findings evaporated or inverted
on contact.
CLAUDE.md gains the invariants that came out of it, and the skill
gains the fourteen measurement traps, each of which produced a wrong
number first — the newest being that a longtask entry arrives after
the task that produced it, so two numbers that must agree are worth
more than one you have to be sceptical about.
yonlu
logan