tri rule-observance: measure the practice, not the seal (Refs #2622) - #2624
Merged
Conversation
`tri loop-rules` checks docs/loop/LOOP-RULES.md against a sealed digest and passes. It closes with its own disclaimer: "This certifies identity only. It does not certify that the rules are correct, nor that the tick obeyed them." That is the file's own R6 -- the seal certifies identity, not correctness -- stated about the tool that enforces it. Nothing measured the second half. Over the last 30 merged pull requests, every author [measured]: branch prefix w699-<topic> 0 of 30 provenance tag on a number 0 of 25 stating one no `Closes #N` autoclose 30 of 30 The tag convention is alive elsewhere: [measured] appears 211 times in docs/theory/IGLA-FORMAL-RESULTS.md. It has never reached a pull request. Two clauses at zero across every author is not one operator drifting. The file and the practice have parted, and the seal made the file look governed while nothing looked at the practice -- a checksum over rules is exactly as strong as a green check over a gate that cannot fail. Reports, does not gate, for two separable reasons. Which way a drift resolves -- practice to rule, rule to practice, or rule plus a gate -- belongs to whoever owns the file, and encoding a preference decides it by default. And most of the file is not mechanically checkable: "your own instrument is the first suspect" is a judgement about a tick's content, and a regex pretending to score it would make the unmeasured look measured. Filed as #2622, including the clause I knowingly do not observe -- "merging is a human act" -- which the owner authorised outside this file. The rule is NOT edited to match what I do: a rules file edited by the thing it governs is worth nothing. Refs #2622
Contributor
|
📓 NotebookLM Notebook linked to this PR
This notebook contains session context, decisions, and artifacts for this work. |
Contributor
PR DashboardGenerated at: 2026-08-23 22:40:16 UTC
Summary
Seal Status
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
tri loop-ruleschecksdocs/loop/LOOP-RULES.mdagainst a sealed digest and passes. It closes with its own disclaimer:That is the file's own R6 — the seal certifies identity, not correctness — stated about the tool that enforces it. Nothing measured the second half.
Over the last 30 merged pull requests, every author
[measured]:w699-<topic>Closes #NautocloseThe tag convention is alive elsewhere —
[measured]appears 211 times in the theory document. It has never reached a pull request.Two clauses at zero across every author is not one operator drifting. The file and the practice have parted, and the seal made the file look governed while nothing looked at the practice — a checksum over rules is exactly as strong as a green check over a gate that cannot fail.
Reports, does not gate
Two separable reasons:
Filed as #2622, including the clause I knowingly do not observe — "merging is a human act" — which the owner authorised outside this file. The rule is not edited to match what I do: a rules file edited by the thing it governs is worth nothing.
And the smaller finding under it: R2 is "your own instrument is the first suspect." I have re-derived that from scratch five times this campaign while it sat written down, sealed, in a file I had never opened.
§104.
Refs #2622