@codyswann/lisa 3.69.5 → 3.70.0

package/expo/copy-overwrite/scripts/bdd/contract.mjs

@@ -78,8 +78,47 @@ export const TRACKER_KEY_PATTERN = /^([A-Z][A-Z0-9]{1,9})-(\d+)$/;
 /** Repo-issue style tracker tag. Group 1 is an optional repo slug. */
 export const TRACKER_GH_PATTERN = /^gh-(?:([a-z0-9]+(?:-[a-z0-9]+)*)-)?(\d+)$/;
 
-/** Adoption states. The ruleset context is required ONLY in `enforced`. */
-export const ADOPTION_STATES = ["not-adopted", "bootstrap", "enforced"];
+/**
+ * The three enforcement levels a project may declare this gate at.
+ *
+ * Restated here, and asserted equal to the registry's `LEVELS` by a unit test,
+ * so the prover can name the valid vocabulary in a refusal message without
+ * importing the registry — which lives in a different template directory and
+ * is not guaranteed to be installed beside this gate.
+ */
+export const GATE_LEVELS = ["required", "optional", "off"];
+
+/**
+ * Adoption vocabulary Lisa used to read, with what to say about each.
+ *
+ * The gate had its OWN adoption axis — a `BDD_MODE` workflow input mirrored by
+ * an `adoption` block in the coverage map — running alongside the gate registry
+ * that every other quality job answers to. Two controls for one question, and
+ * the losing one lost silently.
+ *
+ * `bootstrap` was the reason that axis looked necessary: a visible,
+ * non-blocking check with a named owner and a hard expiry, which is `optional`
+ * plus paperwork. A grace period does not belong in an adoption vocabulary at
+ * all — it hides red, which is the opposite of what adoption is for — so the
+ * state was removed and the axis with it.
+ *
+ * Distinguished from a merely unrecognised value because the gate *knows* what
+ * these were and can say something useful. An unrecognised value might be a
+ * typo; a retired one is not, and telling its author to check for a typo sends
+ * them looking for a mistake they did not make.
+ */
+export const RETIRED_ADOPTION_STATES = Object.freeze({
+  bootstrap:
+    "retired — a time-boxed grace period is `optional` carrying an owner and a " +
+    "date, and it hid red rather than showing it. Declare the gate at one of " +
+    `${GATE_LEVELS.join(", ")} instead.`,
+  "not-adopted":
+    "retired — absence of a declaration is no longer a state the gate carries. " +
+    `Declare the gate at one of ${GATE_LEVELS.join(", ")} instead.`,
+  enforced:
+    "retired — enforcement is what a declared gate does. Declare the gate at " +
+    `one of ${GATE_LEVELS.join(", ")} instead.`,
+});
 
 /**
  * Classify a raw tag as a tracker reference, if it is one.

package/expo/copy-overwrite/scripts/bdd/envelope.mjs

@@ -31,59 +31,6 @@ const ENVELOPE_MODULE_PATHS = Object.freeze([
   "../../../all/copy-overwrite/scripts/lisa-command-envelope.mjs",
 ]);
 
-/**
- * Defect codes bootstrap is PERMITTED to downgrade to a warning.
- *
- * This is an allowlist and it is load-bearing: an unrecognized code — a new
- * check, a typo, a future contributor's addition — is treated as FATAL. A
- * denylist of "fatal codes" would fail OPEN on exactly the value nobody
- * anticipated, which is how a gate quietly stops gating.
- *
- * Everything here is a contract-QUALITY defect: the manifest is legible and
- * the adoption state is coherent, the contract just is not clean yet. Codes
- * about adoption integrity itself (bootstrap-metadata, bootstrap-expired,
- * adoption-drift, config-*, discovery-invalid) are deliberately absent, so
- * they always fail: a malformed discovery block would silently switch off the
- * only check that can see an undeclared test, exactly as a quoted coverage
- * floor silently switches off the bar (`floor-invalid`, likewise absent).
- */
-export const WARNABLE_DEFECT_CODES = Object.freeze([
-  "baseline",
-  "coverage-regression",
-  "discovery-missing",
-  "empty-contract",
-  "exclusion-metadata",
-  "exclusion-stale",
-  "execution-results",
-  "floor-missing",
-  "floor-regression",
-  "mapping-duplicate",
-  "mapping-evidence",
-  "mapping-file",
-  "mapping-orphan",
-  "mapping-platform",
-  "mapping-runner",
-  "obligation-uncovered",
-  "scenario-deleted",
-  "scenario-duplicate-id",
-  "scenario-id",
-  "scenario-lifecycle",
-  "scenario-platform",
-  "scenario-provenance",
-  "scenario-steps",
-  "spec-undisclosed",
-  "tracker-missing",
-  "tracker-orphan",
-  "waiver-duplicate",
-  "waiver-excluded",
-  "waiver-expired",
-  "waiver-masks-mapping",
-  "waiver-metadata",
-  "waiver-orphan",
-  "waiver-platform",
-  "waiver-runner",
-]);
-
 /**
  * Envelope statuses that may exit 0.
  *
@@ -128,19 +75,19 @@ export function subjectFor(item) {
 }
 
 /**
- * Whether any defect must fail the run, given the adoption state.
+ * Whether any defect must fail the run.
  *
- * `enforced` fails on any defect at all. `bootstrap` fails on any defect
- * whose code is NOT on the warnable allowlist. `not-adopted` reaches here
- * only with adoption-integrity defects, which are never warnable.
- * @param {string} adoptionState - not-adopted | bootstrap | enforced.
+ * Every defect does. There used to be a per-code severity split — an allowlist
+ * of 34 contract-quality codes that a `bootstrap` run graded `warning` and
+ * exited 0 on — and the split existed only to make that grace period possible.
+ * With the grace period gone the allowlist has nothing left to serve: a project
+ * that does not want this property enforced declares the gate `off`, which is a
+ * decision someone can read, rather than a green check that found 500 defects.
  * @param {readonly object[]} defects - Defects found.
  * @returns {boolean} True when the run must fail.
  */
-export function hasFatalDefect(adoptionState, defects) {
-  if (defects.length === 0) return false;
-  if (adoptionState === "enforced") return true;
-  return defects.some(item => !WARNABLE_DEFECT_CODES.includes(item.code));
+export function hasFatalDefect(defects) {
+  return defects.length > 0;
 }
 
 /**
@@ -187,23 +134,26 @@ export function contractVersion(contract) {
 }
 
 /**
- * Counters describing the run, plus the adoption state the counts belong to.
+ * Counters describing the run.
  *
  * The five facts stay separate here exactly as they do in the report: what is
  * DECLARED, what is MAPPED (traceability), what RAN, what those runs
  * RETURNED, and what is WAIVED. A reader comparing two runs must never have
  * to infer which one a percentage refers to.
- * @param {object} input - Adoption state, report, defects, and files written.
+ *
+ * There is no `findingsWarning` counter and no `adoptionState`. Both belonged
+ * to the retired adoption axis: severity was decided by it, and the state was
+ * the axis itself. A finding is a finding, and whether the property is governed
+ * at all is answered by the gate declaration, one layer out.
+ * @param {object} input - Report, defects, and files written.
  * @returns {object} The envelope's `summary`.
  */
-export function buildSummary({ adoptionState, report, defects, filesWritten }) {
+export function buildSummary({ report, defects, filesWritten }) {
   const counts = {
     deleted: 0,
     created: filesWritten,
     preserved: 0,
-    adoptionState,
-    findingsError: defects.filter(item => item.severity === "error").length,
-    findingsWarning: defects.filter(item => item.severity === "warning").length,
+    findings: defects.length,
   };
   if (!report) return counts;
   return {