Thore Cimbal
feab9bda73
The human answered the report's open questions: the game-operating mirror exists (a controlled re-probe shows Gitea hides repo existence behind an auth prompt, so the anonymous negative was inconclusive -- withdrawn in F-007); component dormancy is intentional and staged (F-009 addendum); any F-002/F-003 remediation must ship an old->new Zuordnung in the proven style of commit-zuordnung-2026-08-07 (F-002).
3.7 KiB
F-009: Documentation attention and actual work mass point at different components
category: structural-drift confidence: medium
evidence:
- Open issues per component (
analysis/data/gitlab_issues.json):axion1337.chat-gitops35 ·management26 ·ThreadNet-Web9 ·threadnet-call1 ·thread-net-git0 ·threadnet-operating0. - Commit volume over all refs (
analysis/data/git_activity.tsv):axion1337.chat-gitops269 ·ThreadNet-Web52 ·threadnet-operating21 ·threadnet-call12 own ·thread-net-git11. - Repository substance (
analysis/data/tree_*.txt):thread-net-githolds 4 tracked files (.gitignore,README.md,docker-compose.yml, one file underbackup/) and one markdown document; last commit 2026-08-02, 7 days before the reference date.threadnet-operatingholds 27 files, 2 documents. - Against that,
vision/threadnet.md:9-11presents all four ThreadNet repos as equal members of the product line, androadmap.md:50-62gives the ThreadNet line six numbered items, five of which concernThreadNet-Weband none of which concernthread-net-gitorthreadnet-operating. - The component carrying half the open work,
axion1337.chat-gitops, is named in the vision document not at all and inCLAUDE.mdonce, parenthetically, as an equation to a display name (CLAUDE.md:6). - All 14 issues of the newly created M5 — Härtung milestone are in
axion1337.chat-gitops.
impact: A reader forming a mental model from vision/ and roadmap.md will weight five
components roughly equally and will not learn that one of them holds half the backlog while
two are effectively dormant. Session-start reading therefore mis-primes exactly the
prioritisation that the roadmap exists to steer. This is a mismatch, not a defect: dormancy
may be entirely intended — but the documents do not say so, and README.md:68-70 requires
each point to describe "den tatsächlichen Zustand".
root-cause pattern: Documents describe the intended shape, the tracker holds the actual one, and nothing reconciles them. Related to F-001 in mechanism: the tracker is where reality accumulates, the documents are written once.
neckbeard mechanism: AGENTS.md:79 plus scripts/gen_status.py: STATUS.md is a generated
overview of open issues, active designs and recent ADRs, explicitly "do not edit by hand",
and WORKFLOW.md:128 puts reviewing it for "anything stale or surprising" on the refinement
agenda. With ADR-0002's in-repo issues, work mass is countable from the tree, so the
imbalance would be visible in a generated artifact rather than inferable only from an API.
Gap in neckbeard: gen_status.py covers one repo. This project is six, and neckbeard
has no cross-repo status concept — the same missing "components" artifact as in F-008.
confidence note: medium rather than high — the underlying counts are exact, but "attention should follow work mass" is a judgement about intent, and dormant-by-design is a legitimate answer the documents simply do not give.
post-analysis addendum (2026-08-10, session close): the human confirmed the dormancy is
intentional and staged: a base feature set first, then build out monitoring and
security — explicitly avoiding getting lost in polish ("sich nicht in Chromleisten
verrennen"). threadnet-operating rests deliberately. This resolves the intent question
and sharpens the finding rather than dissolving it: the strategy exists, but it lives in
the owner's head and now in this file — no repo document records it. Implication for
Session 2's components artifact (neckbeard gap 2): it needs a lifecycle field
(active / dormant, with the staging rationale) so that intent like this is recorded where
sessions read it.