diff --git a/docs/issues/0040-neckbeard-rueckmeldungen-einreichen.md b/docs/issues/0040-neckbeard-rueckmeldungen-einreichen.md
index 0428b6e..0d05b2e 100644
--- a/docs/issues/0040-neckbeard-rueckmeldungen-einreichen.md
+++ b/docs/issues/0040-neckbeard-rueckmeldungen-einreichen.md
@@ -14,7 +14,9 @@ related:
 > Eigener Akt, bewusst nicht Teil der Migration (Nicht-Ziel im Design).
 > `gitlab_iid` folgt mit dem ersten Spiegel-Lauf.
 
-Als Issues im neckbeard-Repo (`oss-projekte/ai/neckbeard`) einreichen,
+Das fertige Übergabedokument liegt unter
+[docs/sources/migration/neckbeard-uebergabe-feldtest.md](../sources/migration/neckbeard-uebergabe-feldtest.md)
+— von dort als Issues im neckbeard-Repo (`oss-projekte/ai/neckbeard`) einreichen,
 mit Feldtest-Evidenz aus Gate 2 des Design-Dokuments:
 
 1. Viele Repos, ein Regelwerk (Lücke 1; hiesige Lösung: ADR-0013)
diff --git a/docs/issues/0042-migration-in-betrieb-nehmen-push-spiegel-schedule.md b/docs/issues/0042-migration-in-betrieb-nehmen-push-spiegel-schedule.md
index eff20e3..fb0a0b1 100644
--- a/docs/issues/0042-migration-in-betrieb-nehmen-push-spiegel-schedule.md
+++ b/docs/issues/0042-migration-in-betrieb-nehmen-push-spiegel-schedule.md
@@ -14,8 +14,9 @@ related:
 > Die Schritte, die nur sorb ausführt (Nicht-Ziele der Migration:
 > kein Push, kein API-Write durch die Session).
 
-1. Branch `Neckbeard-v0.1.1-migration-1` sichten und nach `main`
-   bringen; Push über git.lab (Mirror zieht nach).
+1. ~~Branch `Neckbeard-v0.1.1-migration-1` sichten und nach `main`
+   bringen; Push über git.lab (Mirror zieht nach).~~ ✅ Erledigt
+   2026-08-11 (Fast-Forward-Merge + Push, von sorb beauftragt).
 2. Ersten Spiegel-Lauf ausführen: `python3 scripts/spiegel_issues.py
    --ausfuehren` (legt 0033–0042 auf GitLab an); danach die vergebenen
    iids als `gitlab_iid` nachtragen — ab dann meldet
diff --git a/docs/sources/migration/neckbeard-uebergabe-feldtest.md b/docs/sources/migration/neckbeard-uebergabe-feldtest.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5cfdc7a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/sources/migration/neckbeard-uebergabe-feldtest.md
@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+# Handoff to the neckbeard repo — field test results, v0.1.1
+
+Written 2026-08-11 at the close of the first real neckbeard adoption.
+In English because it is destined for the neckbeard repo, whose
+artifacts are English by its own convention. This file is the frozen
+handoff record (management repo, `docs/sources/migration/`); carrying
+its content into neckbeard issues is tracked as management issue 0040.
+
+## What happened
+
+- **Field test** against neckbeard `v0.1.1`
+  (`823a08cac6b03a47d7e2f661200a49ac6e09d38d`): two sessions on the
+  `axion1337.chat/management` repo. Session 1 (branch
+  `Neckbeard-v0.1.1-analyse-1`) produced 17 evidence-backed findings —
+  read `analysis/REPORT.md` there, especially the
+  pattern → mechanism → implication table. Session 2 migrated the repo
+  to neckbeard through **all gates of a size-L undertaking**: Gate 0
+  (PROJECT.md), design doc with Gates 1–5, five vertical slices, each
+  with verification evidence and a human STOP.
+- Result: `docs/design/done/2026-08-11-neckbeard-migration.md` on
+  `main` of the management repo — including the Gate-5 AAR and the
+  two-way harvest (old approach's value folded into neckbeard before
+  adoption).
+
+## Relevant for versioning (ADR-0006)
+
+ADR-0006 names "the first completed size-L run in a real project" as
+the sensible trigger for considering `v1.0.0`. **That run now exists
+and is documented.** The schema and rule set survived it, with the
+extensions below — worth weighing before any 1.0 decision.
+
+## Feedback items, each with field evidence
+
+Reference implementations live in the management repo (`scripts/`,
+`schema.yaml`, `docs/components/`); findings F-NNN in the analysis
+branch.
+
+1. **Many repos, one ruleset.** ADR-0001 ends at the repo boundary; a
+   five-component group has no defined sharing mechanism. Solved
+   project-side as pointer + deterministic presence check
+   (management ADR-0013). Evidence: F-011 — 4 of 5 components carried
+   no instruction file and nothing noticed.
+2. **Components artifact.** No artifact type declares "these are the
+   repos and their canonical names"; slug drift was unrepresentable
+   (F-008). Project-side: `component` type, filename = canonical slug.
+3. **Milestone concept.** No field groups issues by what they pay
+   into; the project uses milestones on 100% of open issues (F-014).
+   Project-side: required `milestone` enum on issues.
+4. **SHA citations in prose are never resolved.** F-012: six orphaned
+   citations, mechanically uncheckable. Reference: `pruefe_prosa.py`
+   (resolution via repo, rewrite-mapping table, optional clones, plus
+   a curated exemption list — hex words are not always git SHAs:
+   Authentik uids and Alertmanager silence IDs both matched).
+5. **Git-level hygiene is outside the framework's view** while
+   carrying the project's most sensitive claims (F-002/F-003: 222
+   real-clock commits by own identities believed anonymised).
+   Reference: `gruppenpruefung.py` hygiene check.
+6. **External link targets are never checked.** A live doc routed to a
+   retired tracker (F-005 — eight dead links found in practice).
+   Deterministic partial solution: a denylist of retired URL patterns;
+   full reachability checking deliberately rejected (network-bound).
+7. **Priority field.** The creation AAR filed it as YAGNI with
+   "revisit via refinement". Field evidence for the revisit: 71/71
+   open issues carry exactly one priority, cleanly distinct from the
+   milestone ("how urgent" vs "what it pays into").
+8. **`validate.py` rejects directory links** (`[x](dir/)`), which
+   GitLab renders fine. Opinion question; cost us three pre-existing
+   "broken" links.
+9. **Adopted AGENTS.md has no defined place for project rules.**
+   Solved as: upstream sections byte-true, then a marked project
+   section; a byte-compare check against a vendored pristine baseline
+   (`docs/sources/upstream/`) turns silent framework-file rewrites
+   into red CI. The baseline answers a real adopter question ("will
+   agents rewrite AGENTS.md?") — consider making it part of the
+   adoption path.
+10. **ADR duty for permanent exceptions** exists in this project's old
+    ruleset and proved itself (documented-but-undecided exceptions are
+    a named failure mode); upstream has no such rule.
+11. **A runtime check family beside validate.py.** The project's
+    Stillstandsprüfung principles held up well and generalize: checks
+    only from real incidents, "cannot check" is a finding not a skip,
+    abort instead of silently skipping, project lists read at runtime
+    never maintained in code.
+
+## Where to look
+
+| What | Where |
+|---|---|
+| Field-test findings + data | management branch `Neckbeard-v0.1.1-analyse-1`, `analysis/` |
+| Migration design + AAR | `docs/design/done/2026-08-11-neckbeard-migration.md` (main) |
+| Schema extensions | `schema.yaml` (flagged header) vs `docs/sources/upstream/neckbeard-v0.1.1/schema.yaml` |
+| New check scripts | `scripts/pruefe_upstream_drift.py`, `pruefe_prosa.py`, `gruppenpruefung.py`, `spiegel_issues.py` |
+| Harvested pitfalls | `docs/wiki/stolpersteine/neckbeard-migration.md` |