This is the record of an abcd-managed repository

abcdBetav0.16.2 · 2026-11-06

Development record

2026-09-25 — The build's open-question check reads the record's own settled convention and stays fail-closed (lane implementer, autonomous run A, fix round 1 of the loop lane, on iss-2609252053576085; the lane's first ruling, that every list item under `## Open Questions` is a question whatever it says, lived only in its report and refused intents the record had settled). `intent.OpenQuestions` recognises exactly two markers, learned from the 12 planned intents that carry list items there. A section whose first non-blank line is an italic `_All resolved …_`, with at most one count word (`_All four resolved …_`), is settled whole (itd-111, itd-93); `_All but one resolved_` is not. An item explicitly marked resolved or deferred is not a question: a bold span opening with the word (`**Resolved — …**`, `**Deferred**`, `**Deferred to a follow-up intent**`, `**explicitly deferred**`, `**explicit deferral**`) or the word as a label (`resolved:`, `RESOLVED:`, `Deferred:`), anywhere in the item including its continuation lines. Everything else stays a question: an item led `**Open` whatever it goes on to say (itd-60's "Open, and not gating scope"), an item that only points to another record (itd-76's "travel with itd-126"), `**Out of scope …**`, and a question that merely mentions deferral. With the rule, itd-111 and itd-93 pass the check; itd-7, itd-60, itd-65, itd-66, itd-76, itd-82, itd-117, itd-131, itd-2609170822093401 and itd-2609211116005482 still refuse, each on an item the record does not mark settled. Relabelling those items is the product thinker's call through the planning interview, not the loop's.

decisiondcn-2609250000000028

2026-09-25 — The build's open-question check reads the record's own settled convention and stays fail-closed (lane implementer, autonomous run A, fix round 1 of the loop lane, on iss-2609252053576085; the lane's first ruling, that every list item under ## Open Questions is a question whatever it says, lived only in its report and refused intents the record had settled). intent.OpenQuestions recognises exactly two markers, learned from the 12 planned intents that carry list items there. A section whose first non-blank line is an italic _All resolved …_, with at most one count word (_All four resolved …_), is settled whole (itd-111, itd-93); _All but one resolved_ is not. An item explicitly marked resolved or deferred is not a question: a bold span opening with the word (**Resolved — …**, **Deferred**, **Deferred to a follow-up intent**, **explicitly deferred**, **explicit deferral**) or the word as a label (resolved:, RESOLVED:, Deferred:), anywhere in the item including its continuation lines. Everything else stays a question: an item led **Open whatever it goes on to say (itd-60's "Open, and not gating scope"), an item that only points to another record (itd-76's "travel with itd-126"), **Out of scope …**, and a question that merely mentions deferral. With the rule, itd-111 and itd-93 pass the check; itd-7, itd-60, itd-65, itd-66, itd-76, itd-82, itd-117, itd-131, itd-2609170822093401 and itd-2609211116005482 still refuse, each on an item the record does not mark settled. Relabelling those items is the product thinker's call through the planning interview, not the loop's.

Frontmatter

iddcn-2609250000000028
typedecision
date2026-09-25

mentions14