Remove hardcoded kdl spec names #1082

Closed
opened 2026-07-10 21:00:47 +00:00 by coilysiren · 4 comments
Owner

The problem

This pr desc implies that it was going to do that

But the pr just moves the names around ? They are all still there

#1058

Proposed change

Remove them

Alternatives considered

//

Before filing

  • I searched existing issues and this is not a duplicate.
  • This stays within ward's scope (the dev-verb gate / agent driver), not a personal-infra or downstream-repo verb.
### The problem This pr desc implies that it was going to do that But the pr just moves the names around ? They are all still there https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-flight-deck/ward/pulls/1058 ### Proposed change Remove them ### Alternatives considered // ### Before filing - [x] I searched existing issues and this is not a duplicate. - [x] This stays within ward's scope (the dev-verb gate / agent driver), not a personal-infra or downstream-repo verb.
Owner

Release triage note from Kai on 2026-07-15: headless carry is valid. Remove hardcoded KDL spec names by resolving or enumerating specs from config/metadata instead of embedding specific spec names in ward code.

Release triage note from Kai on 2026-07-15: headless carry is valid. Remove hardcoded KDL spec names by resolving or enumerating specs from config/metadata instead of embedding specific spec names in ward code.
Owner

WARD-TRIAGE: warded control plane coherence milestone

This issue is part of the warded control plane coherence sprint. The release thesis is to make warded feel like one dependable control plane for agent work: higher safe parallelism, coherent config defaults, reliable broker/container behavior, human-feedback gates, and enough structured evidence for the next actor after a paused or failed run.

For this sprint, headless means an engineer should be able to carry the issue from current issue context to a merged change without new human decisions. If the issue discovers a missing decision, split or demote the unclear part instead of guessing.

WARD-TRIAGE: warded control plane coherence milestone This issue is part of the `warded control plane coherence` sprint. The release thesis is to make `warded` feel like one dependable control plane for agent work: higher safe parallelism, coherent config defaults, reliable broker/container behavior, human-feedback gates, and enough structured evidence for the next actor after a paused or failed run. For this sprint, `headless` means an engineer should be able to carry the issue from current issue context to a merged change without new human decisions. If the issue discovers a missing decision, split or demote the unclear part instead of guessing.
Owner

WARDED_WORKFLOW: reservation-held

reservation details

Holder: launch intent for container engineer-codex-ward-1082 on host kais-macbook-pro-2.local.

Accepted by ward agent --harness codex (reserved 2026-07-15T13:41:41Z). Concurrent ward agent runs are blocked until this intent becomes visible or the intent is released. The stale-intent fallback is still TTL-bounded (3h TTL). --override-reservation overrides.

Do not comment on or edit this issue to steer the run while it is reserved. The engineer seeded the body once at launch and never re-reads it, so a comment or edit reaches only human readers, never the running engineer. A correction goes to a new issue, dispatched fresh. That is the only channel that reaches a run in flight. Where the forge supports it, ward locks this conversation to make that a road-block rather than a convention (ward#494).

run seed context — what this run is carrying (ward#609)
  • Resolved: coilyco-flight-deck/ward#1082 · branch issue-1082 · harness codex · workflow pull-request-and-merge
  • Run: engineer-codex-ward-1082 · ward v0.710.0 · dispatched 2026-07-15T13:41:32Z
  • Comment thread: 2 included in the pre-flight read, 0 stripped (ward's own automated comments).

Static container doctrine and seed boilerplate are identical every run and omitted here (they ride ward v0.710.0).

— Codex, via ward agent

<!-- ward-agent-reservation --> WARDED_WORKFLOW: reservation-held <details><summary>reservation details</summary> Holder: launch intent for container `engineer-codex-ward-1082` on host `kais-macbook-pro-2.local`. Accepted by `ward agent --harness codex` (reserved 2026-07-15T13:41:41Z). Concurrent `ward agent` runs are blocked until this intent becomes visible or the intent is released. The stale-intent fallback is still TTL-bounded (3h TTL). `--override-reservation` overrides. **Do not comment on or edit this issue to steer the run while it is reserved.** The engineer seeded the body once at launch and never re-reads it, so a comment or edit reaches only human readers, never the running engineer. A correction goes to a **new issue, dispatched fresh**. That is the only channel that reaches a run in flight. Where the forge supports it, ward locks this conversation to make that a road-block rather than a convention (ward#494). <details><summary>run seed context — what this run is carrying (ward#609)</summary> - **Resolved:** `coilyco-flight-deck/ward#1082` · branch `issue-1082` · harness `codex` · workflow `pull-request-and-merge` - **Run:** `engineer-codex-ward-1082` · ward `v0.710.0` · dispatched `2026-07-15T13:41:32Z` - **Comment thread:** 2 included in the pre-flight read, 0 stripped (ward's own automated comments). - included: @coilyco-ops (2026-07-15T06:55:29Z), @coilyco-ops (2026-07-15T07:16:33Z) Static container doctrine and seed boilerplate are identical every run and omitted here (they ride ward v0.710.0). </details> </details> <!-- ward-agent-signature --> — Codex, via `ward agent`
Owner

WARDED_WORKFLOW: #1457

details

workflow: pull-request-and-merge; review summary: skipped (review gate intentionally skipped because the temporary ward default is pending brokered QA)

Implemented the Forgejo bundle lookup without hardcoded ward-kdl/ward aliasing, and added a regression test for a ward-branded wrap. Felt straightforward once the bundle scan was narrowed to the ops forgejo suffix. Confidence is high. Surprise: the first CI run looked like a cold-cache timeout, but the rerun went green. Follow-up: none.

WARDED_WORKFLOW: https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilyco-flight-deck/ward/pulls/1457 <details><summary>details</summary> workflow: pull-request-and-merge; review summary: skipped (review gate intentionally skipped because the temporary ward default is pending brokered QA) Implemented the Forgejo bundle lookup without hardcoded `ward-kdl`/`ward` aliasing, and added a regression test for a `ward`-branded wrap. Felt straightforward once the bundle scan was narrowed to the `ops forgejo` suffix. Confidence is high. Surprise: the first CI run looked like a cold-cache timeout, but the rerun went green. Follow-up: none. </details>
Commenting is not possible because the repository is archived.
No project
No assignees
2 participants
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference
coilyco-flight-deck/ward#1082
No description provided.