docs(w8.3): define stateful and sidecar upgrade gate #507
Labels
No labels
W6d-automerge-calibration
agent/claude-code
agent/codex
agent/hermes
agent/iskra
agent/ollama
agent/patchwarden
automerge-candidate
class/security-sensitive
cutover-gate
dependency/blocked
dependency/blocks-others
dependency/cross-repo
dependency/needs-confirmation
domain:agents
domain:ci
domain:docs
domain:forgejo
domain:infra
domain:memory
domain:runtime
domain:signal
domain:ux
flow/architecture
flow/blocked
flow/deployed
flow/done
flow/implementation
flow/intake
flow/maintained
flow/observed
flow/ready
flow/refining
flow/retired
flow/review
iterating
judge/codex-candidate
judge/hermes-candidate
judge/low-confidence
judge/needs-refinement
judge/operator-needed
judge/p0
judge/p1
judge/p2
judge/p3
judge/park
judge/patchwarden-candidate
judge/stale-priority
kind/adr
kind/bug
kind/chore
kind/feature
kind/infra
kind/ops
kind/refactor
kind/research
large-impact
merge/auto
merge/manual
merge/manual-dependency-conflict
merge/manual-failing-tests
merge/manual-merge-conflict
merge/manual-missing-review
merge/manual-operator-preference
merge/manual-red-zone
merge/manual-security-sensitive
merge/manual-unclear-scope
merge/manual-unknown
meta
mode:operator-only
mode:patchwarden-iskra-approved
mode:safe-auto
needs-operator-decision
needs-triage
not-ready
observed/erroring
observed/needs-followup
observed/pending
observed/retire-candidate
observed/unused
observed/used
operator-emotional
owner-attention
phase/02
phase/03
priority:p0
priority:p1
priority:p2
priority:p3
proposed
ready-for-agent
ready-for-operator
recovery
review:claude-reviewed
review:codex-reviewed
review:dziadek-reviewed
review:needs-human
risk/exposure
risk/process
risk/product
risk/runtime
safety:external-write
safety:no-prod-mutation
safety:prod-impact
safety:secret-touch
size/large
size/medium
size/small
size/tiny
size/unknown
source/adr
source/agent-generated
source/manual
source/operator-chat
source/voice-note
status:blocked
status:codex-ready
status:merged:pending-evidence
status:needs-evidence
status:operator-needed
status:parked
tier/full
tier/lite
tier/stacked
tier:0-platform-substrate
tier:1-iskra-value-layer
tier:2-tools-products-modules
type:bug
type:chore
type:docs
type:feat
type:policy
type:research
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
pdurlej/platform#507
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Spec sources (whitelist)
state/cycle/W8-module-upgrade-prep.md§W8.3 sidecar/stateful / Required Evidence Per Upgrade PR / Stop Conditionsstate/cycle/W8-readiness-2026-05-26.md§Candidate Classification / Stop Conditionsstate/cycle/W8-minio-init-pilot.md§Risk Class / Smoke Contract For Future Runtime Approvaldecisions/0022-module-source-and-release-boundaries.md§Update workflow / Anti-patternsExtracted context
Do NOT read (unless escape hatch fires)
compose/— no service wiring changes.state/cutover/— destructive cleanup is a separate M01/W3d gate.Allowed touched paths
state/cycle/W8-stateful-sidecar-gate.md(create)state/cycle/W8-module-upgrade-prep.md(modify, short gate reference only)Why this exists (product-first)
W8 will slow down or become risky if every stateful module has to re-argue the same backup/rollback rules. A small gate document lets agents prepare upgrade PRs consistently while keeping real state changes behind the right operator approvals.
Why this matters now
minio-initproved a sidecar-bound packet. Before anyminio,redis,postgres, or similar module upgrade, the platform needs one shared checklist for backup-before, restore confidence, smoke shape, and stop conditions.What "done" looks like
stateful,sidecar-bound,secret-bearing, andpublic-edgeupgrade classes.minio-init,minio,redis, andpostgresusing metadata-only language.Scope
In scope:
Out of scope:
Suggested approach
Escape hatch
If the gate needs a new ADR or contradicts ADR-0022/W3 restore stance, stop and comment on #389 rather than inventing policy.
Unknowns / owner questions
Risk class
risk/runtimerisk/processrisk/exposurerisk/productClass of service
class/security-sensitiveTrace
Sequencing note from codex: keep this proposed until #505/#506 land; then mark ready-for-agent as the next W8 batch. This is not blocked on more ADR/policy work, only on avoiding parallel drift while the first two packets establish current evidence.