Skip to content

docs(status): add support tiers and claim-proof map#243

Merged
EffortlessSteven merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/support-tier-claims
May 13, 2026
Merged

docs(status): add support tiers and claim-proof map#243
EffortlessSteven merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/support-tier-claims

Conversation

@EffortlessSteven

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

  • add docs/status/SUPPORT_TIERS.md as the initial claim-to-proof map
  • define stable, stable/internal, advisory, experimental, and planned support tiers
  • map current Shipper claims to proof commands, artifacts, and owners without promoting PR 15: 0.4.0-rc.1 release dry-run proof #195 or Reconcile early

Scope boundary

This is PR 5 only: the support-tier model and initial claim map. It intentionally does not add ADRs, active goals, checker code, CI wiring, README claim changes, or #195 release proof work.

Validation

  • cargo fmt --all -- --check
  • cargo xtask check-file-policy --mode blocking-allowlist
  • cargo xtask policy-report

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard.
To continue using code reviews, add credits to your account and enable them for code reviews in your settings.

@gemini-code-assist

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

You have reached your daily quota limit. Please wait up to 24 hours and I will start processing your requests again!

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented May 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@EffortlessSteven has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 9 minutes and 18 seconds before requesting another review.

You’ve run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: cc9e45b9-da0b-4683-a53d-789acfc34988

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 999e4de and 495c60d.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • docs/status/SUPPORT_TIERS.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch docs/support-tier-claims

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@factory-droid

factory-droid Bot commented May 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Droid finished @EffortlessSteven's task —— View job


Droid review validation complete ✓

Review Summary:
Both P1 issues are valid: the no-panic baseline filename is incorrectly listed as .toml instead of .json, and the proof source for the 0.4.0 readiness claim references a non-existent docs/release/ directory. Both comments are approved for posting as they identify concrete factual errors that would mislead maintainers.

Results:

  • 2 comments validated and posted
  • 0 rejected
  • 0 security findings

| Manifest-level topological publish planning | stable | Planner regression tests; `shipper plan`; roadmap #109 | engine |
| File-policy enforcement | stable/internal | `cargo xtask check-file-policy --mode blocking-allowlist`; `cargo xtask policy-report`; CI `Policy` job | release/ci |
| Rust 1.95 / 0.4 policy floor | stable/internal | Workspace lints; `cargo xtask check-lint-policy`; `cargo clippy --workspace --all-targets --all-features -- -D warnings` | rust/lints |
| No-panic production baseline | stable/internal | `cargo xtask no-panic check`; `policy/no-panic-baseline.toml` | rust/lints |

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[P1] Incorrect no-panic baseline filename

The proof source for "No-panic production baseline" references policy/no-panic-baseline.toml, but the actual file is policy/no-panic-baseline.json. The no-panic-baseline.json is machine-generated and linguist-marked in .gitattributes; no-panic-baseline.toml does not exist in the repository. This will cause maintainers following the proof command to receive a file-not-found error.

Suggested change
| No-panic production baseline | stable/internal | `cargo xtask no-panic check`; `policy/no-panic-baseline.toml` | rust/lints |
| No-panic production baseline | stable/internal | `cargo xtask no-panic check`; `policy/no-panic-baseline.json` | rust/lints |

| Trusted Publishing default | planned/advisory | Future Trusted Publishing spec and #96 | release/ci |

## Rules

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[P1] Proof source references non-existent file

The claim "0.4.0 release readiness proof" lists docs/release/0.4.0-readiness.md as its proof source, but the docs/release/ directory does not exist and no such file is present in the repository. Since this file's purpose is to be the claim-to-proof map for Shipper, a proof source pointing to a file that cannot be found undermines the document's verifiability — even though the claim is correctly marked as planned until #195.

Suggested change
| 0.4.0 release readiness proof | planned until #195 | Future `docs/release/0.4.0-readiness.md` (pending #195) | release/ci |

@EffortlessSteven EffortlessSteven merged commit 38d23d5 into main May 13, 2026
26 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant