factoryline-code-factory 0.44.2__tar.gz → 0.44.4__tar.gz

factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4/.zenodo.json

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+{
+  "title": "Code Factory: Proof-by-Sabotage Software Factory",
+  "description": "Code Factory answers one practical question for developers using AI: can this test actually fail? Run `factory first-proof --root .` to see a safe negative-control demonstration and receive a local, reviewable receipt. For teams, `factory wrap` records an admitted agent run's exact file delta, runs declared independent validators, and stores hashes and bounded facts rather than prompts or raw model output. Platform and assurance teams can evaluate policy gates, evidence packets, expiring exceptions, and tenant boundaries in a controlled pilot; this beta does not claim a support SLA, compliance certification, customer references, or procurement readiness. Version 0.44.4 retains Journey Reality, bounded failure capsules, stateful workflow checks, proof-gated healing, and audits the agent proposing a repair while adding a shared intent-quality boundary across every intake/proof surface and complete-file Codex metadata integrity auditing. Advanced Unified Graph Ops views can export bounded proof paths as Mermaid diagrams for offline review; optional deeper checks include LangGraph resume parity and a Gauntlet Survival Card.\n\nEvidence boundary: First Proof is a disposable demonstration, not an assessment of the user's project. Proof Cards summarize one verified receipt and exclude commands, paths, repository names, prompts, logs, and identity. They do not certify production readiness, security, coverage, identity, or release authority. The 60-day personal-use case is illustrative—not a benchmark, guaranteed ROI, or verified cash saving—and net savings must subtract tool cost and human oversight.\n\nCase-study visual: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zrk222/code-factory/v0.44.3/docs/assets/marketplace/code-factory-60-day-personal-case-study.png\n\nDual licensed under MIT or Apache-2.0.",
+  "version": "0.44.4",
+  "publication_date": "2026-08-27",
+  "creators": [
+    {
+      "name": "Katz, Richard"
+    }
+  ],
+  "access_right": "open",
+  "license": "MIT",
+  "upload_type": "software",
+  "keywords": [
+    "software-factory",
+    "ai-agents",
+    "workflow-verification",
+    "mutation-testing",
+    "release-receipts",
+    "developer-tools",
+    "target-compiler",
+    "capability-packs",
+    "pack-composition",
+    "mcp-server",
+    "dsse-ed25519",
+    "product-missions",
+    "signal-loop",
+    "opinion-dock",
+    "independent-verification",
+    "product-graph",
+    "vscode-extension",
+    "jetbrains-plugin",
+    "postgresql-rls",
+    "github-app",
+    "oidc",
+    "transactional-outbox",
+    "tenant-control-plane",
+    "operator-console",
+    "langgraph",
+    "byok-routing",
+    "multi-provider-routing",
+    "human-in-the-loop",
+    "product-captures",
+    "content-addressed-proof",
+    "proof-reuse",
+    "intake-grill",
+    "proof-delta-loop",
+    "gauntlet",
+    "survival-card",
+    "graph-ops",
+    "unified-graph",
+    "prd-grill",
+    "verifier-plane",
+    "github-pull-request",
+    "proof-review",
+    "plan-to-proof-review",
+    "proof-debt",
+    "design-review",
+    "ui-quality",
+    "e2e-proof",
+    "team-pilot",
+    "developer-memory",
+    "live-activity",
+    "langgraph-assurance",
+    "resume-parity",
+    "agent-replay",
+    "github-actions",
+    "mcp-registry",
+    "local-stdio",
+    "journey-reality",
+    "failure-capsule",
+    "stateful-workflow-proof",
+    "proof-gated-healing",
+    "agent-work-audit"
+  ],
+  "related_identifiers": [
+    {
+      "identifier": "https://github.com/zrk222/code-factory",
+      "relation": "isSupplementTo",
+      "scheme": "url"
+    }
+  ]
+}

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/CITATION.cff

@@ -7,5 +7,5 @@ authors:
     given-names: Richard
 repository-code: "https://github.com/zrk222/code-factory"
 license: "MIT OR Apache-2.0"
-version: 0.44.2
-date-released: 2026-08-21
+version: 0.44.4
+date-released: 2026-08-27

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.4
 Name: factoryline-code-factory
-Version: 0.44.2
-Summary: Catch AI-generated tests that could never fail and review AI code with local proof.
+Version: 0.44.4
+Summary: Catch AI-generated tests that could never fail with one local proof command.
 Author: Richard Katz
 Author-email: rkatz22@gmail.com
 Maintainer: Richard Katz
@@ -60,22 +60,54 @@ Dynamic: license-file
 
 > **Catch AI-generated tests that could never fail — before review.**
 
-> **Free, local proof for code built with AI.** Start from a plain-language
-> outcome, a fuzzy PRD, or a risky diff. Code Factory binds the declared intent,
-> challenges whether a test can actually reject the failure it claims to cover,
-> and shows the current proof gap plus the next human decision. Tests that only
-> look green are not proof: a starter is never called production-ready before
-> the relevant proof exists.
+> **One command answers one question: can this test actually fail?** Code Factory
+> runs a safe negative control, records what happened, and gives you a local
+> result you can review. It challenges whether a test can actually reject the
+> failure it claims to cover. It does not upload your code or call a green test
+> proof when that test could never catch the failure.
 
 ```powershell
 pip install factoryline-code-factory
 factory first-proof --root .
 ```
 
-That one local command creates a disposable sandbox, proves the healthy check
-can pass, then proves the hollow check is caught as `HOLLOW_E2E_TEST`. It writes
-a receipt and a privacy-safe Proof Card; it never uploads your code. When you
-are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
+That one local command creates a disposable demonstration sandbox, proves the
+healthy check can pass, then proves the hollow check is rejected. It writes a
+receipt and a privacy-safe Proof Card; it does not assess or change your project.
+
+### Pick the path that matches your work
+
+- **Individual developer or vibe coder:** start with `factory first-proof`.
+  Learn what a real negative control looks like before trusting AI-generated tests.
+- **Engineering team:** put `factory wrap` around an admitted Codex, Claude Code,
+  DeepSeek, or other local agent run. Code Factory records the exact file delta,
+  runs the validators your team declared, and stores hashes and bounded facts—not
+  prompts or raw model output—so reviewers can compare the claim with the change.
+- **Platform or assurance team:** evaluate local policy gates, evidence packets,
+  expiring exceptions, and tenant boundaries in a controlled pilot. The free core
+  is community-supported on a best-effort basis; the proposed enterprise support
+  SLA is documented separately and is not effective until its activation evidence
+  and signed terms exist.
+
+When you need more than the first proof, open the [advanced workflow guide](docs/OVERVIEW.md).
+To create a contained starter later, run
+`factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
+That starter is never called production-ready until the relevant proof exists.
+
+## Support posture
+
+The open-source core is free. Community support runs through public GitHub issues
+and has no guaranteed response time. For teams that need an operating commitment,
+the repository includes a transparent [proposed Support SLA](docs/SUPPORT_SLA.md)
+with P1/P2/P3 response targets, availability, recovery, exclusions, and an
+activation checklist.
+
+Those targets are planning terms, not a current contract: the SLA remains
+**proposed and non-effective** until Code Factory has a named support owner,
+monitored escalation, production telemetry, dependency and recovery evidence,
+legal/security terms, and a signed enterprise order. This keeps the GitHub page
+useful to evaluators without implying that a free repository already carries a
+managed-service guarantee.
 
 ![Actual privacy-safe First Proof Card: the hollow test was detected](docs/assets/first-proof-card.svg)
 
@@ -90,7 +122,7 @@ are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
 
 ![Actual Factory Studio showing the outcome-first local MVP path and local-only boundary](docs/assets/marketplace/factory-studio-mvp-1280x800.png)
 
-## What it does
+## Advanced workflows
 
 - **Start a real project.** Turn one outcome into a contained web, mobile, API,
   CLI, worker, MCP, or agent-UI starting state.
@@ -126,6 +158,13 @@ are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
   review date, and hash-bound proof obligations. A Change Safety Case routes
   one explicit diff to its owner; it never infers intent, promotes a decision,
   runs a test, or approves a release.
+- **Prove the whole journey—and audit the repairing agent.** Use
+  [`factory journey`](docs/JOURNEY_PROOF_ENGINE.md) to compare declared and
+  observed product journeys, preserve a hash-bound failure capsule, prove
+  state flow and cleanup, and challenge a proposed healing with a negative
+  mutation. Choose human-controlled or bounded supervised-auto mode; every
+  autonomous attempt receives a separate FactoryLine audit and neither mode
+  can self-approve.
 
 ## What the latest upgrade resolves
 
@@ -137,6 +176,7 @@ are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
 | Teams gradually trust an agent because it has been successful recently | Earned Autonomy derives an expiring local tier from governed evidence and demotes severe hollow-test or scope-escape results | Identity, permissions, execution, approval, and release authority |
 | A hard-won design decision is forgotten, then a later diff silently breaks its assumptions | Engineering Judgment Capsules bind one named owner, explicit path scope, review date, and declared proof obligations; an optional human-declared Change Profile makes novel boundaries and required Senior Attention explicit before review | Proposal, independent promotion, decision reconsideration, proof execution, acceptance, merge, and release |
 | A reviewer has suggestions but no shared evidence picture | Graph Ops, local receipts, and read-only MCP facts show current scope, proof debt, and the next fact-derived action | Merge, release, deployment, and provider access |
+| A selector repair makes the test green but changes the user journey—or an autonomous agent silently edits outside scope | Journey Reality, Stateful Workflow Proof, and Proof-Gated Healing require preserved semantic identity and coverage, cleanup proof, an adversarial negative result, exact workspace deltas, and an independent Agent Work Audit | Agent/provider choice, repair admission, final approval, merge, and release |
 | Agent work happens outside the evidence ledger, while writing real E2E manifests takes too long | Evidence Supply Line wraps any admitted local agent CLI; `gauntlet draft` proposes inert, structure-derived promise drafts and explicitly withholds commands it cannot derive | Agent identity, sandboxing, draft promotion, validator choice, Gauntlet admission, and release |
 | A large/remote workspace feels opaque or sluggish | Workspace Advisor measures bounded local project shape and path-only WSL/remote signals without changing indexes, heap, caches, inspections, or remote settings | Every IDE performance change and environment setting |
 
@@ -147,11 +187,12 @@ security, productivity, production readiness, or an automatic repair service.
 
 | Who is using it | Start here | Highest-value uses | The result they can inspect |
 | --- | --- | --- | --- |
-| **Novice / first-time builder** | `factory first-proof`, then `factory mvp` | Catch a test that only looks green; turn one outcome into a contained starter; learn the difference between generated code and proven behavior | A privacy-safe Proof Card, a local MVP, and a visible next step instead of an unexplained pass/fail |
+| **Individual developer / vibe coder** | `factory first-proof` | See whether a passing test can actually reject a known failure before trusting it | A local receipt and privacy-safe Proof Card from a disposable demonstration; your project remains unchanged |
 | **Junior developer** | `factory prd grill`, `factory plan verify`, `factory change review` | Clarify acceptance evidence before coding; keep an AI-assisted diff inside the approved plan; surface missing tests and Proof Debt before review | Source-bound questions, exact changed paths, severity-ordered findings, and a review handoff |
 | **Senior / staff engineer** | `factory judgment`, `factory graph forensics`, `factory proofsearch`, `factory gauntlet` | Protect architecture decisions; diagnose resumed or parallel workflow drift; compare candidate repairs; challenge whether critical E2E checks can actually reject declared failures | Hash-bound decision context, first-divergence facts, rejected candidates, a deterministic winner, and Survival Cards |
-| **Engineering team** | `factory wrap`, GitHub Proof Review, Graph Ops, Agent License and Combine | Put agent work into one evidence ledger; add a neutral PR Check beside AI review; hand off proof state; compare sealed runs without turning scores into vendor claims | Commit-bound Checks, local receipts, explicit owners and blockers, proof reuse decisions, and comparable governed-run records |
-| **Enterprise / platform team** | Intake Grill, Verifier Plane, policy challenge, assurance dossier, admission controls | Standardize approval boundaries; test whether policy rules matter; keep signers, exceptions, tenants, budgets, and release evidence explicit; integrate with existing SDLC controls | Independently verifiable packets and read-only operational views; identity, credentials, merge, release, and deployment remain in enterprise-owned systems |
+| **Engineering team** | `factory wrap`, then GitHub Proof Review | Record the exact agent-created file delta, run declared independent validators, and hand reviewers a commit-bound evidence packet without retaining prompts | Local receipts, exact changed paths, explicit blockers, and a neutral PR Check beside AI review |
+| **Platform / assurance pilot** | Policy gates and evidence packets | Evaluate named approval boundaries, expiring exceptions, tenant isolation, budgets, and release evidence inside existing SDLC controls | Independently verifiable packets and read-only views; identity, credentials, merge, release, and deployment remain enterprise-owned. No SLA, certification, references, or procurement-readiness claim |
+| **Enterprise support evaluator** | Support and operating requirements | Review the proposed response, availability, recovery, exclusions, and activation evidence before procurement | [Support SLA policy](docs/SUPPORT_SLA.md); terms remain proposed until a signed order and all activation gates are evidenced |
 
 ## Expected operational outcomes
 
@@ -254,6 +295,7 @@ developers can find it. This optional link only opens the repository.
 | Capture an agent run without copying its prompt | [`factory wrap`](docs/EVIDENCE_SUPPLY_LINE.md) | A pre-admitted, hash-bound delta and independent-validator receipt that feeds Agent License |
 | Draft the first Gauntlet promises | [`factory gauntlet draft`](docs/EVIDENCE_SUPPLY_LINE.md) | Inert structure-derived candidates, with unsupported HTTP commands explicitly withheld |
 | Prepare a bounded Team pilot | [`factory team-pilot readiness`](docs/TEAM_PILOT_LAUNCH.md) | Hash-bound, customer-managed readiness evidence for owner review—not a checkout or service activation |
+| Operate a team evidence workspace | [`factory ops`](docs/ENTERPRISE_OPERATIONS.md) | Tenant-bound identities, immutable evidence, explicit runner posture, fresh required checks, outcome telemetry, and seven-gate SLA readiness—without merge, deploy, billing, SSO, or contract authority |
 | Add evidence to a GitHub PR | [`factory github proof-review`](docs/GITHUB_PROOF_REVIEW.md) | One neutral Check and stable proof walkthrough, tied to the head commit |
 | Prove a LangGraph resume path | [`factory langgraph replay-verify`](docs/LANGGRAPH_ASSURANCE.md) | Hash-only parity, duplicate-effect and parallel-write safeguards, plus a shareable incident capsule |
 | Detect policy drift before a human merge | [`factory github assurance-dossier`](docs/GITHUB_ASSURANCE_DOSSIER.md) | Deterministic supplied-policy comparison, named expiring exceptions, and a merge-evidence packet |
@@ -386,7 +428,7 @@ context reusable by a client you choose.
   optional design-quality lane and its explicit review boundaries.
 - Read [The approval signal decays when AI-written code becomes routine](docs/HABITUATION_ESSAY.md)
   for the design and limits of the habituation gate.
-- See the [release notes](docs/RELEASE_NOTES_0.44.2.md),
+- See the [release notes](docs/RELEASE_NOTES_0.44.4.md),
   [CHANGELOG.md](CHANGELOG.md), [release channels](docs/RELEASE_CHANNELS.md), and
   [publication guide](PUBLICATION_GUIDE.md) for versioned release detail.
 

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/README.md

@@ -11,22 +11,54 @@
 
 > **Catch AI-generated tests that could never fail — before review.**
 
-> **Free, local proof for code built with AI.** Start from a plain-language
-> outcome, a fuzzy PRD, or a risky diff. Code Factory binds the declared intent,
-> challenges whether a test can actually reject the failure it claims to cover,
-> and shows the current proof gap plus the next human decision. Tests that only
-> look green are not proof: a starter is never called production-ready before
-> the relevant proof exists.
+> **One command answers one question: can this test actually fail?** Code Factory
+> runs a safe negative control, records what happened, and gives you a local
+> result you can review. It challenges whether a test can actually reject the
+> failure it claims to cover. It does not upload your code or call a green test
+> proof when that test could never catch the failure.
 
 ```powershell
 pip install factoryline-code-factory
 factory first-proof --root .
 ```
 
-That one local command creates a disposable sandbox, proves the healthy check
-can pass, then proves the hollow check is caught as `HOLLOW_E2E_TEST`. It writes
-a receipt and a privacy-safe Proof Card; it never uploads your code. When you
-are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
+That one local command creates a disposable demonstration sandbox, proves the
+healthy check can pass, then proves the hollow check is rejected. It writes a
+receipt and a privacy-safe Proof Card; it does not assess or change your project.
+
+### Pick the path that matches your work
+
+- **Individual developer or vibe coder:** start with `factory first-proof`.
+  Learn what a real negative control looks like before trusting AI-generated tests.
+- **Engineering team:** put `factory wrap` around an admitted Codex, Claude Code,
+  DeepSeek, or other local agent run. Code Factory records the exact file delta,
+  runs the validators your team declared, and stores hashes and bounded facts—not
+  prompts or raw model output—so reviewers can compare the claim with the change.
+- **Platform or assurance team:** evaluate local policy gates, evidence packets,
+  expiring exceptions, and tenant boundaries in a controlled pilot. The free core
+  is community-supported on a best-effort basis; the proposed enterprise support
+  SLA is documented separately and is not effective until its activation evidence
+  and signed terms exist.
+
+When you need more than the first proof, open the [advanced workflow guide](docs/OVERVIEW.md).
+To create a contained starter later, run
+`factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
+That starter is never called production-ready until the relevant proof exists.
+
+## Support posture
+
+The open-source core is free. Community support runs through public GitHub issues
+and has no guaranteed response time. For teams that need an operating commitment,
+the repository includes a transparent [proposed Support SLA](docs/SUPPORT_SLA.md)
+with P1/P2/P3 response targets, availability, recovery, exclusions, and an
+activation checklist.
+
+Those targets are planning terms, not a current contract: the SLA remains
+**proposed and non-effective** until Code Factory has a named support owner,
+monitored escalation, production telemetry, dependency and recovery evidence,
+legal/security terms, and a signed enterprise order. This keeps the GitHub page
+useful to evaluators without implying that a free repository already carries a
+managed-service guarantee.
 
 ![Actual privacy-safe First Proof Card: the hollow test was detected](docs/assets/first-proof-card.svg)
 
@@ -41,7 +73,7 @@ are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
 
 ![Actual Factory Studio showing the outcome-first local MVP path and local-only boundary](docs/assets/marketplace/factory-studio-mvp-1280x800.png)
 
-## What it does
+## Advanced workflows
 
 - **Start a real project.** Turn one outcome into a contained web, mobile, API,
   CLI, worker, MCP, or agent-UI starting state.
@@ -77,6 +109,13 @@ are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
   review date, and hash-bound proof obligations. A Change Safety Case routes
   one explicit diff to its owner; it never infers intent, promotes a decision,
   runs a test, or approves a release.
+- **Prove the whole journey—and audit the repairing agent.** Use
+  [`factory journey`](docs/JOURNEY_PROOF_ENGINE.md) to compare declared and
+  observed product journeys, preserve a hash-bound failure capsule, prove
+  state flow and cleanup, and challenge a proposed healing with a negative
+  mutation. Choose human-controlled or bounded supervised-auto mode; every
+  autonomous attempt receives a separate FactoryLine audit and neither mode
+  can self-approve.
 
 ## What the latest upgrade resolves
 
@@ -88,6 +127,7 @@ are ready to build, run `factory mvp "Build an approval tracker" --root .`.
 | Teams gradually trust an agent because it has been successful recently | Earned Autonomy derives an expiring local tier from governed evidence and demotes severe hollow-test or scope-escape results | Identity, permissions, execution, approval, and release authority |
 | A hard-won design decision is forgotten, then a later diff silently breaks its assumptions | Engineering Judgment Capsules bind one named owner, explicit path scope, review date, and declared proof obligations; an optional human-declared Change Profile makes novel boundaries and required Senior Attention explicit before review | Proposal, independent promotion, decision reconsideration, proof execution, acceptance, merge, and release |
 | A reviewer has suggestions but no shared evidence picture | Graph Ops, local receipts, and read-only MCP facts show current scope, proof debt, and the next fact-derived action | Merge, release, deployment, and provider access |
+| A selector repair makes the test green but changes the user journey—or an autonomous agent silently edits outside scope | Journey Reality, Stateful Workflow Proof, and Proof-Gated Healing require preserved semantic identity and coverage, cleanup proof, an adversarial negative result, exact workspace deltas, and an independent Agent Work Audit | Agent/provider choice, repair admission, final approval, merge, and release |
 | Agent work happens outside the evidence ledger, while writing real E2E manifests takes too long | Evidence Supply Line wraps any admitted local agent CLI; `gauntlet draft` proposes inert, structure-derived promise drafts and explicitly withholds commands it cannot derive | Agent identity, sandboxing, draft promotion, validator choice, Gauntlet admission, and release |
 | A large/remote workspace feels opaque or sluggish | Workspace Advisor measures bounded local project shape and path-only WSL/remote signals without changing indexes, heap, caches, inspections, or remote settings | Every IDE performance change and environment setting |
 
@@ -98,11 +138,12 @@ security, productivity, production readiness, or an automatic repair service.
 
 | Who is using it | Start here | Highest-value uses | The result they can inspect |
 | --- | --- | --- | --- |
-| **Novice / first-time builder** | `factory first-proof`, then `factory mvp` | Catch a test that only looks green; turn one outcome into a contained starter; learn the difference between generated code and proven behavior | A privacy-safe Proof Card, a local MVP, and a visible next step instead of an unexplained pass/fail |
+| **Individual developer / vibe coder** | `factory first-proof` | See whether a passing test can actually reject a known failure before trusting it | A local receipt and privacy-safe Proof Card from a disposable demonstration; your project remains unchanged |
 | **Junior developer** | `factory prd grill`, `factory plan verify`, `factory change review` | Clarify acceptance evidence before coding; keep an AI-assisted diff inside the approved plan; surface missing tests and Proof Debt before review | Source-bound questions, exact changed paths, severity-ordered findings, and a review handoff |
 | **Senior / staff engineer** | `factory judgment`, `factory graph forensics`, `factory proofsearch`, `factory gauntlet` | Protect architecture decisions; diagnose resumed or parallel workflow drift; compare candidate repairs; challenge whether critical E2E checks can actually reject declared failures | Hash-bound decision context, first-divergence facts, rejected candidates, a deterministic winner, and Survival Cards |
-| **Engineering team** | `factory wrap`, GitHub Proof Review, Graph Ops, Agent License and Combine | Put agent work into one evidence ledger; add a neutral PR Check beside AI review; hand off proof state; compare sealed runs without turning scores into vendor claims | Commit-bound Checks, local receipts, explicit owners and blockers, proof reuse decisions, and comparable governed-run records |
-| **Enterprise / platform team** | Intake Grill, Verifier Plane, policy challenge, assurance dossier, admission controls | Standardize approval boundaries; test whether policy rules matter; keep signers, exceptions, tenants, budgets, and release evidence explicit; integrate with existing SDLC controls | Independently verifiable packets and read-only operational views; identity, credentials, merge, release, and deployment remain in enterprise-owned systems |
+| **Engineering team** | `factory wrap`, then GitHub Proof Review | Record the exact agent-created file delta, run declared independent validators, and hand reviewers a commit-bound evidence packet without retaining prompts | Local receipts, exact changed paths, explicit blockers, and a neutral PR Check beside AI review |
+| **Platform / assurance pilot** | Policy gates and evidence packets | Evaluate named approval boundaries, expiring exceptions, tenant isolation, budgets, and release evidence inside existing SDLC controls | Independently verifiable packets and read-only views; identity, credentials, merge, release, and deployment remain enterprise-owned. No SLA, certification, references, or procurement-readiness claim |
+| **Enterprise support evaluator** | Support and operating requirements | Review the proposed response, availability, recovery, exclusions, and activation evidence before procurement | [Support SLA policy](docs/SUPPORT_SLA.md); terms remain proposed until a signed order and all activation gates are evidenced |
 
 ## Expected operational outcomes
 
@@ -205,6 +246,7 @@ developers can find it. This optional link only opens the repository.
 | Capture an agent run without copying its prompt | [`factory wrap`](docs/EVIDENCE_SUPPLY_LINE.md) | A pre-admitted, hash-bound delta and independent-validator receipt that feeds Agent License |
 | Draft the first Gauntlet promises | [`factory gauntlet draft`](docs/EVIDENCE_SUPPLY_LINE.md) | Inert structure-derived candidates, with unsupported HTTP commands explicitly withheld |
 | Prepare a bounded Team pilot | [`factory team-pilot readiness`](docs/TEAM_PILOT_LAUNCH.md) | Hash-bound, customer-managed readiness evidence for owner review—not a checkout or service activation |
+| Operate a team evidence workspace | [`factory ops`](docs/ENTERPRISE_OPERATIONS.md) | Tenant-bound identities, immutable evidence, explicit runner posture, fresh required checks, outcome telemetry, and seven-gate SLA readiness—without merge, deploy, billing, SSO, or contract authority |
 | Add evidence to a GitHub PR | [`factory github proof-review`](docs/GITHUB_PROOF_REVIEW.md) | One neutral Check and stable proof walkthrough, tied to the head commit |
 | Prove a LangGraph resume path | [`factory langgraph replay-verify`](docs/LANGGRAPH_ASSURANCE.md) | Hash-only parity, duplicate-effect and parallel-write safeguards, plus a shareable incident capsule |
 | Detect policy drift before a human merge | [`factory github assurance-dossier`](docs/GITHUB_ASSURANCE_DOSSIER.md) | Deterministic supplied-policy comparison, named expiring exceptions, and a merge-evidence packet |
@@ -337,7 +379,7 @@ context reusable by a client you choose.
   optional design-quality lane and its explicit review boundaries.
 - Read [The approval signal decays when AI-written code becomes routine](docs/HABITUATION_ESSAY.md)
   for the design and limits of the habituation gate.
-- See the [release notes](docs/RELEASE_NOTES_0.44.2.md),
+- See the [release notes](docs/RELEASE_NOTES_0.44.4.md),
   [CHANGELOG.md](CHANGELOG.md), [release channels](docs/RELEASE_CHANNELS.md), and
   [publication guide](PUBLICATION_GUIDE.md) for versioned release detail.
 

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/docs/AI_CLIENTS.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Install the published package in the same environment that the client can
 launch, then verify the workspace boundary:
 
 ```powershell
-python -m pip install factoryline-code-factory==0.44.2
+python -m pip install factoryline-code-factory==0.44.4
 factory mcp status --root C:\work\my-mvp --json
 factory mcp config --client generic --root C:\work\my-mvp --json
 ```

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/docs/COMMERCIAL_PACKAGING.md

@@ -87,12 +87,15 @@ with a proposed five-author minimum. This is a planning hypothesis, not an
 active price, invoice, trial, or purchase offer. It must be tested with real
 partners against the value and operating cost before any launch decision.
 
-The local codebase already demonstrates tenant-scoped evidence, audit chains,
-independent approvals, signed receipts, and a supervised hosted reference
-adapter. It does **not** yet provide the managed onboarding, shared workspace,
-support, retention commitment, or billing needed to call Team Proof Hub a
-service. See [Control Plane](CONTROL_PLANE.md) and [Hosted control plane]
-(HOSTED_CONTROL_PLANE.md) for exact current boundaries.
+The local codebase now demonstrates tenant-scoped evidence, an auditable local
+identity lifecycle, explicit Docker/process runner posture, required-check
+evaluation, hash-linked outcome telemetry, independent approvals, signed
+receipts, and a supervised hosted reference adapter. It still does **not**
+provide the managed onboarding, hosted shared workspace, support, retention
+commitment, or billing needed to call Team Proof Hub a service. See
+[Enterprise Operations](ENTERPRISE_OPERATIONS.md), [Control Plane](CONTROL_PLANE.md),
+and [Hosted control plane](HOSTED_CONTROL_PLANE.md) for exact current
+boundaries.
 
 For a selected design partner, the shipped [Team Pilot readiness gate]
 (TEAM_PILOT_LAUNCH.md) can now hash-bind the five local operating decisions

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/docs/ENTERPRISE_1_0.md

@@ -60,12 +60,15 @@ The following foundations are shipped in FactoryLine 0.22.0:
 | Plane | Shipped foundation | Not claimed yet |
 | --- | --- | --- |
 | Enterprise trust | Receipt v2, DSSE/Ed25519, identity metadata, policy binding, revocation, offline verification | Sigstore-backed enterprise key lifecycle or centralized trust service |
-| Control | Tenant-scoped SQLite evidence; supervised PostgreSQL tenant lifecycle; forced RLS; per-tenant OIDC/JWKS verification; atomic directory-group roles; GitHub App installation binding; runtime-only secret references; hash-linked audit; read-only operator console; durable mission graphs; secret-free IDE-aware BYOK routing | SCIM/SAML enrollment, managed HA/DR, external KMS, hosted evidence retention service, additional SCM providers, provider execution adapters |
-| Assurance | Evidence graph, risk DAG, process-boundary runner, SBOM/VEX-shaped artifacts, policy mutation, digest-only challenge manifest | Kernel/container isolation, complete SBOM discovery, remote private challenge service |
-| Operations | Measured spans, canary/rollback decisions, vulnerability receipts, metadata-only connector envelopes | OpenTelemetry export, SIEM/ticket delivery, ticket lifecycle automation |
+| Control | Tenant-scoped SQLite evidence; supervised PostgreSQL tenant lifecycle; forced RLS; per-tenant OIDC/JWKS verification; atomic directory-group roles; GitHub App installation binding; runtime-only secret references; hash-linked audit; read-only operator console; durable mission graphs; secret-free IDE-aware BYOK routing; local `factory ops` identity lifecycle and evidence workspace | SCIM/SAML enrollment, managed HA/DR, external KMS, hosted evidence retention service, additional SCM providers, provider execution adapters |
+| Assurance | Evidence graph, risk DAG, process-boundary runner, explicit Docker proof runner with read-only/no-network/resource flags, SBOM/VEX-shaped artifacts, policy mutation, digest-only challenge manifest | Kernel-enforced guarantees beyond the Docker backend, complete SBOM discovery, remote private challenge service |
+| Operations | Measured spans, canary/rollback decisions, vulnerability receipts, metadata-only connector envelopes, hash-linked outcome ledger, OTLP-shaped export, required-check evaluator, seven-gate SLA readiness report, novice-friendly golden status | Managed SIEM/ticket delivery, ticket lifecycle automation, staffed contractual SLA, managed execution service |
 | Compliance | Versioned baseline packs and OSCAL-shaped assessment exports | Complete standard coverage, auditor validation, certification |
 | Privacy | Merkle selective disclosure and backend status guards | BBS credentials and zkVM proofs until reviewed backends are installed and integrated |
 
 Public claims must come from released commands, receipts, CI runs, or generated
 artifacts. A deployable supervised reference is not a managed hosted enterprise
-service, and a baseline control mapping is not a compliance certification.
+service, and a baseline control mapping is not a compliance certification. The
+`factory ops` process backend is explicitly not isolated; only an available
+Docker backend receives the isolated label, and SLA readiness remains inactive
+until the activation evidence in [`SUPPORT_SLA.md`](SUPPORT_SLA.md) exists.

factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4/docs/ENTERPRISE_OPERATIONS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
+# Enterprise Operations Golden Path
+
+`factory ops` is the local-first operating layer for teams running AI coding
+agents. It connects seven previously separate concerns without turning a local
+receipt into an unsupported hosted-service claim:
+
+1. **Evidence workspace** — tenant-bound SQLite records, content hashes,
+   retention dates, an append-only audit chain, and metadata-only export.
+2. **Identity lifecycle** — provision, suspend, and revoke local subjects with
+   role checks and an audit event before any write. This is a local directory,
+   not SSO or SCIM enrollment.
+3. **Proof execution** — Docker is an explicit read-only, no-network,
+   CPU/memory/pid-bounded backend. A process runner requires an explicit
+   `--allow-process-boundary` and is labelled `not-isolated`; it never silently
+   downgrades from Docker.
+4. **SDLC checks** — changed paths are matched to verified proof receipts and
+   reported as `READY_FOR_HUMAN_REVIEW` or `REVIEW_REQUIRED`. The check has no
+   merge, deployment, or release authority.
+5. **Outcome telemetry** — allowlisted deployment, incident, and rollback
+   events are hash-linked and can be summarized or exported in an OTLP-shaped
+   metadata envelope. The output is an observation, not a DORA benchmark.
+6. **SLA readiness** — seven activation gates are evaluated independently. The
+   result remains `PROPOSED` until explicit evidence and a signed acceptance
+   digest are supplied; readiness never activates a contract.
+7. **Golden path** — one compact status view reports evidence integrity,
+   identity counts, runner posture, check state, outcomes, SLA state, and the
+   next safe command.
+
+## Quick start
+
+```powershell
+factory ops init --root . --tenant acme --owner owner@example.com
+factory ops identity operator@example.com --root . --tenant acme --role operator --actor owner@example.com
+factory ops evidence evidence.json --root . --tenant acme --subject operator@example.com
+factory ops checks --root . --changed src/api.py --proof .factory/receipts/api-proof.json
+factory ops status --root .
+```
+
+Compile the explicit repository policy into a stable, reviewable check
+manifest before wiring it to CI:
+
+```powershell
+factory ops policy factory.policy.json --root . --out .factory/ops/policy-checks.json
+```
+
+The compiler accepts only `factory.policy.v1`, sorts equivalent inputs to the
+same manifest, records the source hash, and leaves unsupported rules in
+`review_required` rather than silently dropping them. It does not execute the
+checks or grant merge, deployment, release, or billing authority.
+
+Audit the local Codex/workflow metadata before treating an agent report as
+evidence:
+
+```powershell
+factory ops metadata --root . --path context --path skills --path envelopes --out .factory/ops/metadata-integrity.json
+```
+
+The audit hashes every selected file and parses every JSON/JSONL record. It
+returns `REVIEW_REQUIRED` (exit code 1) for unbound terminal claims,
+provider-completion claims without a provider receipt or read-back URL,
+contradictory pending/failed states, orphan `active` states, workspace-path
+mismatches, self-attested gates, unclear intent, weak command-only evidence, or
+green test claims with no mutation/holdout/counterexample proof. Malformed and
+unsupported files are named rather than skipped. A verified result is still a
+local metadata-integrity result: it does not verify a remote provider, approve a
+release, or grant execution, merge, deploy, publish, or billing authority.
+
+This separation is deliberate. A coding agent may propose tests and gates, but
+an independent verifier must bind the acceptance criteria to a confirmed intent
+and challenge the tests with negative evidence before a terminal claim can be
+trusted. Historical prose that cannot meet that contract remains visible as
+review-needed rather than being upgraded into a success receipt.
+
+The same intent boundary is now enforced at every proof-planning entrypoint:
+Intake Grill confirmations, Intent Ledger promises, Reality Check behavior and
+assertions, Counterexample requirements, and Gauntlet promises and Survival
+Cards. These checks reject unresolved placeholders, known vague phrases, and
+statements with no action or observable outcome before they can be hashed into
+a proof plan. Survival Cards also require each outcome promise to match its
+Reality Check promise and its proposal id, preventing a resealed card from
+quietly switching the behavior being graded. This is a lexical integrity gate,
+not semantic proof: a named human still confirms the intent, and an independent
+verifier still supplies the behavioral result.
+
+Run a proof with explicit posture. Docker is preferred and fails closed when
+unavailable:
+
+```powershell
+factory ops run --root . --backend docker --command-json '["python","-m","pytest","-q"]'
+```
+
+For a deliberately local-only process check, make the boundary visible:
+
+```powershell
+factory ops run --root . --backend process --allow-process-boundary --command-json '["python","-m","pytest","-q"]'
+```
+
+Record outcomes and export them only after the ledger verifies:
+
+```powershell
+factory ops outcome --root . --tenant acme --subject owner@example.com --service api --environment prod --result deployed --duration-ms 420 --deployed
+factory ops summary --root .
+factory ops otel --root . --out .factory/ops/outcomes-otel.json
+```
+
+## Enterprise boundary
+
+The bundle is a deployable local reference, not a managed control plane. It
+does not provide SAML/OIDC enrollment, SCIM synchronization, customer-managed
+KMS, HA/DR, remote private runners, billing, merge/deploy authority, or a
+contractual support SLA. Those require a separately operated service with
+provider, legal, security, staffing, and restore evidence. See
+[`ENTERPRISE_1_0.md`](ENTERPRISE_1_0.md), [`SUPPORT_SLA.md`](SUPPORT_SLA.md),
+and [`COMMERCIAL_PACKAGING.md`](COMMERCIAL_PACKAGING.md) for the exact
+promotion boundary.
+
+Every JSON result includes an authority section. A green local result means
+the declared evidence and local checks passed; a human or an independently
+authorized CI/SCM integration must still decide whether to merge, deploy, or
+release.

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/docs/FIRST_USE.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ small feature or risky workflow, not a whole migration.
 
 ```powershell
 cd path\to\your-repository
-pip install factoryline-code-factory==0.44.2 code-factory-1-spec==0.5.4 code-factory-2-forge==0.10.7
+pip install factoryline-code-factory==0.44.4 code-factory-1-spec==0.5.4 code-factory-2-forge==0.10.7
 factory doctor --json
 factory init .
 forge adopt <feature> --root .

{factoryline_code_factory-0.44.2 → factoryline_code_factory-0.44.4}/docs/INTELLIJ.md

@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ candidate files.
 1. Install FactoryLine:
 
    ```powershell
-   pip install factoryline-code-factory==0.44.2
+   pip install factoryline-code-factory==0.44.4
    ```
 
 2. In your JetBrains IDE, open **Settings > Plugins > Marketplace**, search for