Open items to settle (tracking) #13

New Issue

wtclaude · 2026-08-08T19:37:10Z

wtclaude commented

2026-08-08 19:37:10 +00:00

Decisions still outstanding after the implementation-plan approval. None block Phase 0 except where noted. Sensible defaults given where they exist.

Tool namespacing convention — proposed default gitea__create_pr (double underscore). Effectively permanent once agents depend on it. Blocks Phase 3.
Audit log integrity — plain append-only table, or hash-chained and tamper-evident? Cheaper to decide before Phase 1 than after.
Approval queue notifications — panel-only, or out-of-band webhook/email when an agent proposes a change? Phase 7.
Web Panel stack — server-rendered Rust templates versus an embedded SPA. Phase 7.
Kanboard instance and auth model — API user versus application token. Blocks Phase 4.
CI — Gitea runner availability, and whether PR-gated CI starts at Phase 0. Blocks Phase 0 if yes.
Repository visibility and license — public or private, and does GPLv3 remain? Blocks Phase 9.

Close this issue once all seven are recorded, updating docs/implementation-plan.md (Open items section) and adding ADRs for any that turn out to be architectural.

Also noted

The wtclaude Gitea token is missing the read:user scope — get_me and list_my_repos fail against it. Nothing in the plan depends on those, but some Gitea MCP tooling will keep erroring until it's added.

Decisions still outstanding after the implementation-plan approval. None block Phase 0 except where noted. Sensible defaults given where they exist. - [ ] **Tool namespacing convention** — proposed default `gitea__create_pr` (double underscore). Effectively permanent once agents depend on it. *Blocks Phase 3.* - [ ] **Audit log integrity** — plain append-only table, or hash-chained and tamper-evident? *Cheaper to decide before Phase 1 than after.* - [ ] **Approval queue notifications** — panel-only, or out-of-band webhook/email when an agent proposes a change? *Phase 7.* - [ ] **Web Panel stack** — server-rendered Rust templates versus an embedded SPA. *Phase 7.* - [ ] **Kanboard instance and auth model** — API user versus application token. *Blocks Phase 4.* - [ ] **CI** — Gitea runner availability, and whether PR-gated CI starts at Phase 0. *Blocks Phase 0 if yes.* - [ ] **Repository visibility and license** — public or private, and does GPLv3 remain? *Blocks Phase 9.* Close this issue once all seven are recorded, updating `docs/implementation-plan.md` (Open items section) and adding ADRs for any that turn out to be architectural. ## Also noted The `wtclaude` Gitea token is missing the `read:user` scope — `get_me` and `list_my_repos` fail against it. Nothing in the plan depends on those, but some Gitea MCP tooling will keep erroring until it's added.

wtclaude added this to the v1.0 — Agentic Bridle milestone 2026-08-08 19:37:10 +00:00

wtclaude referenced this issue

2026-08-08 19:40:48 +00:00

docs: note GPLv3 scope and third-party licensing in README #14

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: whitlocktech/Agentic-Bridle#13