Development record
A lapsed hold or reservation must be lifted without a person, or autonomous work waits on a holder that no longer exists. On 2026-10-24 a computer that had reserved a release cut (rel-v0.15.2) and dozens of issues and intents crashed. Its leases lapsed, yet sessions on another machine kept waiting on it: one session relayed the release hold to six others as live, from a read made before it lapsed, two finished pull requests waited for the dead cut's ruling, and a build was held behind the crashed copy's work. The product thinker ruled the same day that lifting a lapsed hold is autonomous: no person is needed to declare a lapsed holder gone. The reading side already counts a reservation five minutes past its expiry as released. What is missing is that every reader, verb and agent instruction acts on that, and that spent branches leave origin without a person. This record carries the ruling that the whole path runs unattended.
A lapsed hold or reservation must be lifted without a person, or autonomous work waits on a holder that no longer exists. On 2026-10-24 a computer that had reserved a release cut (rel-v0.15.2) and dozens of issues and intents crashed. Its leases lapsed, yet sessions on another machine kept waiting on it: one session relayed the release hold to six others as live, from a read made before it lapsed, two finished pull requests waited for the dead cut's ruling, and a build was held behind the crashed copy's work. The product thinker ruled the same day that lifting a lapsed hold is autonomous: no person is needed to declare a lapsed holder gone. The reading side already counts a reservation five minutes past its expiry as released. What is missing is that every reader, verb and agent instruction acts on that, and that spent branches leave origin without a person. This record carries the ruling that the whole path runs unattended.
How status and peers name an abandoned cut is a peer session's capture, iss-2610241104098581, which was not on origin when this was written.
Grounds
- pursued: a session shown a release hold stops treating it as live once it lapses, without anyone declaring the holder gone; shown wrong if a lapsed cut is still relayed as holding merges, or a land waits on one past its lapse
Frontmatter
| id | iss-2610241107191205 |
|---|---|
| type | issue |
| lifecycle | resolved |
| severity | major |
.abcd/work/issues/resolved/iss-2610241107191205-a-lapsed-hold-or-reservation-must-be.md
open on GitHub ↗ · commit history ↗
mentions3
- dcn-26102719225024802026-10-27 — Majors ruling for the next cut, product thinker, 27 October 2026, on abcd-78's recommendations for the 17 hand-captured majors since v0.15.1. Fix before the cut: the eight recommended fixes (iss-2610251555094324, iss-2610241537197997, iss-2610241414124940, iss-2610241911052191, iss-2610241240133009, iss-2610241133284600, iss-2610241239492159, iss-2610241519088123) and five recommended for deferral that the product thinker chose to fix instead: the short install command in the docs (iss-2610240827243654), a worktree per session (iss-2610240859590333), clearing lapsed holds everywhere (iss-2610241107191205), the reflect criteria (iss-2610241431221889) and the measured home-folder receipt (iss-2610241551259104). Deferred one cycle: iss-2610241228359748, iss-2610240932215918, iss-2610241613191748. Amended and closed: iss-2610241427397332 (itd-3's obsolete criteria). The 69 consistency-pass majors are ruled on branch decisions/interview-2026-10-27.
- dcn-26102817271513482026-10-28 — Merge-gate step 3 (itd-2610150602547271, recording the review pair's verdicts for a head) goes ahead while other copies hold files it shares, under the coordinator's narrowed rule for lapsed holds (recorded with the store-and-sweep change): a hold that overlaps only in files, on another subject, with nothing pushed, does not hold a ready change back. The laptop's iss-2610241107191205 shares only commands/land.md, has pushed nothing but its reservation ref, and is about lapsed holds and reservations in internal/core/claim. Step 3 changes no claim code and no behaviour of a lapsed hold or reservation: its change stays in internal/core/landing (a review receipt store beside the preflight receipts) and the land verb's --record-review flag. This machine's itd-2609151838312703 (sessions announce what they do) and itd-2610091010348892 (the hosted site) share land.md, 38-land.md, land.go and land_surface_test.go, but neither is about review receipts. With no shared subject, step 3 lands when it is ready, and whichever change lands second merges main. Ruled by the coordinator, abcd-f5, on 2026-10-28; applied by lane A.
- iss-2610241104098581Sessions treat merges as held for a release cut whose holder has crashed: on 2026-10-24 local session abcd-0d told every session that v0.15.2 is being cut so merges are held, while the only marker of that cut on origin is the reservation rel-v0.15.2, held by copy 07cd3b4c167cec332f8c01cf42ad41d6 (a computer that crashed), last renewed 2026-10-23T08:52:49Z and expired 2026-10-24T08:52:49Z, with no standing announcement, no release branch and no newer tag. Nothing names a cut as abandoned: abcd status lists rel-v0.15.2 as an ordinary expired reservation, so a session reading it, or relaying a hold heard earlier, keeps work waiting on a session that no longer exists, and two finished pull requests (the drain spec's landed marks, the fix for iss-2610110918418459) sat waiting for a ruling from it.