This is the record of an abcd-managed repository

abcdBetav0.16.2 · 2026-11-06

Development record

The embark chapter still calls the judgement over a lifeboat an 'oracle product audit'; itd-125 renamed it a review everywhere

issuewontfixminoriss-2610262033072029

The embark chapter still calls the judgement over a lifeboat an 'oracle product audit'; itd-125 renamed it a review everywhere

A terminology drift (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

  • End A: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/03-embark.md:248 — "would re-run the oracle product audit against the"
  • End B: .abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-125-the-lifeboat-verdict-says-what-it-is.md:22 — "produced by an oracle, holding a review verdict — three words for one thing."

itd-125 says the judgement over a packed lifeboat is a review (abcd disembark review, returning SHIP, NEEDS_WORK or MAJOR_RETHINK). It says the old wording, an audit produced by an oracle holding a review verdict, was three words for one thing and is now one word in the verb, the flag, the artefact and the prose. The embark chapter's refresh-audit modifier would re-run the oracle product audit and report drift against the disembark-time audit, and its probe 'runs no product audit'. That is the retired wording, still used for the same judgement.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 363.

Grounds

  • declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536) as a duplicate of iss-2610262032268272. Same embark.md line 248 using the retired audit wording, cited here against itd-125's rename instead of disembark's review.

Frontmatter

idiss-2610262033072029
typeissue
lifecyclewontfix
severityminor

References1

mentions2