This is the record of an abcd-managed repository

abcdBetav0.16.2 · 2026-11-06

Development record

adr-29 and adr-25 still narrate adr-6 in prose, but adr-6 is in no store and is absent from all git history (the ADR set landed in one import commit; 0004/0006/0008/0014-0018 were never migrated, and every one but 0006 is accounted for by a successor's supersedes). adr-29 states in its own body that adr-6's decision stands and that adr-29 does not supersede it, so the supersession vocabulary cannot record it and neither ADR body should be rewritten to paper over it. iss-39 closed the machine-readable half (the two related_adrs entries, and the two brief pages that cited it). The surviving prose sites are adr-29 lines 24, 39, 43, 56, 60, 63, 71 and adr-25 lines 51, 80; adr-29's line 43 in particular still says it "links to ADR-6" now that the frontmatter link is gone, which is the residual made legible rather than hidden.

issueopenminoriss-179

adr-29 and adr-25 still narrate adr-6 in prose, but adr-6 is in no store and is absent from all git history (the ADR set landed in one import commit; 0004/0006/0008/0014-0018 were never migrated, and every one but 0006 is accounted for by a successor's supersedes). adr-29 states in its own body that adr-6's decision stands and that adr-29 does not supersede it, so the supersession vocabulary cannot record it and neither ADR body should be rewritten to paper over it. iss-39 closed the machine-readable half (the two related_adrs entries, and the two brief pages that cited it). The surviving prose sites are adr-29 lines 24, 39, 43, 56, 60, 63, 71 and adr-25 lines 51, 80; adr-29's line 43 in particular still says it "links to ADR-6" now that the frontmatter link is gone, which is the residual made legible rather than hidden.

What adr-6 WAS is recoverable from the commissioned review, so a future reader does not start from zero: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-07-06-plan-consistency/05-link-structure.md lines 47-49 name the original file (adrs/adr-6-rp-review-storage-and-architecture.md) and quote its outbound links, and 03-cross-corpus-consistency.md line 42 records its disposition — voided by dcn-2607060000000001 ("no external tools … RepoPrompt … codex"), together with adr-8 and adr-17, the only other two ADRs that decision voids. Both of those have since been pruned by a successor that names them (adr-25 supersedes adr-8, adr-22 supersedes adr-17), which is what leaves adr-6 alone: same voiding decision, no successor record. That review also observes that adrs/README.md's deprecated status ("the decision no longer applies but no successor replaces it") is the state this fits and is used zero times, which is a candidate disposition: adr-6 is not superseded, it is voided.

Decide whether the record restores adr-6 as a deprecated stub carrying that disposition, marks the unmigrated predecessors some other way, or accepts the prose as historical narration; record_schema is frontmatter-scoped and does not read prose, so nothing gates this either way.

Remedy grounds (2026-09-29)

The deprecated status in adrs/README.md is the state the 2026-07-06 plan-consistency review found this fits (voided, no successor), and it keeps both ADR bodies unrewritten. Rejected: a supersedes link from adr-29, which that ADR's own text says it is not.

Frontmatter

idiss-179
typeissue
lifecycleopen
severityminor

mentions8