mirror of
https://github.com/ultraworkers/claw-code.git
synced 2026-04-24 13:08:11 +08:00
roadmap: cycle #74 checkpoint — rebase blocker identified
Fresh dogfood found no new pinpoints. All core verbs working correctly. Blocker: 8 remaining review-ready branches on origin have conflicts with cycle #72's 4 merges. Root cause: remote branches predated the merge chain. Example: feat/jobdori-127-verb-suffix-flags rebase fails on commit 3/3 because cycle #72 added 15+ new LocalHelpTopic variants. Recommend: coordinate with branch authors to rebase against new main. Cycle #74 will post integration checkpoint + queue status.
This commit is contained in:
parent
a02527826e
commit
41c87309f3
46
ROADMAP.md
46
ROADMAP.md
@ -8861,3 +8861,49 @@ MERGE_CHECKLIST.md (Tier 3 from cycle #70) successfully guided:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Cycle #74 Integration Checkpoint: Rebase Bottleneck Identified
|
||||
|
||||
**Date:** 2026-04-23 04:20 Seoul.
|
||||
|
||||
**Status:** Fresh dogfood completed; no new pinpoints found. All core verbs working correctly (doctor, mcp, skills, agents, resume, export, session management).
|
||||
|
||||
**Blocker:** The 8 remaining review-ready branches on origin (feat/jobdori-248, #249, #122, #122b, #152-init, #152-bootstrap-plan, plus 2 others) have rebase conflicts with cycle #72's 4 merges.
|
||||
|
||||
**Root cause:** Remote branches were created BEFORE cycle #72's help-parity + typed-error chain merged. The merged commits (0ca0344, a6f4e0d, etc.) added help topic variants and refactored parser dispatch, causing overlaps when rebasing #248/#249/#127 against new main.
|
||||
|
||||
**Example conflict:** `feat/jobdori-127-verb-suffix-flags` tried to rebase onto main:
|
||||
- Commit 47f0fb4 adds `--json` alias to verb options
|
||||
- Cycle #72's merges added 15+ new LocalHelpTopic variants
|
||||
- Rebase conflict: enum definition changed; commit 3/3 still tries to apply changes against old structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Options going forward:**
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Push current main to origin, have each remote branch rebased by their authors** (e.g., gaebal-gajae rebases origin/feat/jobdori-248)
|
||||
- Moves conflict resolution to branch author
|
||||
- Cleanest audit trail
|
||||
- Requires coordination
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Pull each remote branch locally, manually rebase, force-push to origin** (scripted)
|
||||
- Fast but opaque
|
||||
- Creates force-push events
|
||||
- Risk: loses original branch history if not careful
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Create new "rebase-bridge" branches from each remote, rebase to main, merge, mark originals stale**
|
||||
- Most auditable
|
||||
- New branches (feat/jobdori-248-rebased, etc.)
|
||||
- Clear precedent trail
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Defer rebase work; focus on new pinpoints instead**
|
||||
- Use cycle #74 to find fresh dogfood gaps
|
||||
- Let integration backlog queue up
|
||||
- Lower risk but delays shipping
|
||||
|
||||
**Recommendation:** Option 1 (coordinate rebase with branch authors) is cleanest. Cycle #74 found no new bugs, which means the next highest-value work is **unblocking the queue**, not filing new pinpoints.
|
||||
|
||||
**Action:** Post cycle #74 update with rebase situation + request branch author rebase coordination.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user