Dashboard › institutional-transition-lab › Session 188bbMl9GKrJ
188bbMl9GKrJwMpSiPerform a READ-ONLY, source-first, performance-blinded governance adjudication for these 5 Valkey records, in exact order: valkey-github-issue-4509, valkey-github-pr-1390, valkey-github-pr-1788, valkey-github-pr-2927, valkey-github-pr-345.
Repository: /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab Authoritative frozen files only:
Required order:
Return one substantive final response only. State reviewer provenance: reviewer_id opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b, reviewer_type llm, model openai/gpt-5.6-sol, role source_adjudicator, assistance Independent source-first adjudication of Valkey records 36-40. If actual model differs, return BLOCKED with actual model. ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/research/oss-governance-coding-protocol-v1.2.md</path> <type>file</type> <content> 1: # Performance-blinded OSS governance coding protocol v1.2 2: 3: Date frozen: 2026-08-27 4: Status: pre-adjudication evaluator correction; model-informed development protocol 5: 6: ## Correction 7: 8: The V1.1 run used the intended frozen 40-record manifest and unchanged coders. 9: Its mandatory artifact audit found that the evaluator's field named “strict 10: edge agreement” compared actor, right, target, direction, and status but omitted 11: edge scope and evidence references. It also did not route disagreements in the 12: separately coded body/patch relationship. Six records were consequently called 13: `provisional_exact_agreement` despite material differences. 14: 15: V1.2 corrects the evaluator before any source adjudication or canonical graph 16: construction: 17: 18: - strict edge signatures now include scope and the complete grounded ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-coding-v1.schema.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: {
2: "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
3: "$id": "https://github.com/BYK/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-coding-v1.schema.json",
4: "title": "Performance-blinded governance coding v1",
5: "type": "object",
6: "additionalProperties": false,
7: "required": ["record_class", "event_kind", "title", "announced_on", "effective_on", "affected_scope", "body_patch_relation", "power_changes", "confidence", "ambiguity"],
8: "properties": {
9: "record_class": {"enum": ["effective_institutional_change", "announced_institutional_change", "proposal_only", "control_event", "no_event", "abstain"]},
10: "event_kind": {"type": ["string", "null"], "enum": ["leadership", "board_or_steering", "control_rights", "reorganization", "foundation_transfer", "license", "fork", "reunification", "strategy", "product", "external", ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: {
2: "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
3: "$id": "https://institutional-transition-lab.local/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json",
4: "title": "Performance-blinded governance adjudication v1",
5: "type": "object",
6: "additionalProperties": false,
7: "required": [
8: "schema_version",
9: "adjudication_id",
10: "design_status",
11: "transition_dates_excluded",
12: "outcome_data_used",
13: "inputs",
14: "reviewers",
15: "records"
16: ],
17: "properties": {
18: "schema_version": {"const": 1},
19: "adjudication_id": {"type": "string", "minLength": 1},
20: "design_status": {
21: "const": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication"
22: },
23: "transition_dates_excluded": {"const": true},
24: "outcome_data_used": {"const": false},
25: ...
Found 5 matches /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json: Line 1422: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509", Line 1444: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1390", Line 1484: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1788", Line 1632: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-2927", Line 1666: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-345",
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1422: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
1423: "source_type": "github_issue",
1424: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
1425: "sources": [
1426: {
1427: "filename": null,
1428: "kind": "github_body",
1429: "source_id": "body",
1430: "text": "[NEW] Create n8n-nodes-valkey repository for n8n Valkey Vector Store community node\n\n## The problem/use-case that the feature addresses\n\nn8n is an open-source workflow automation platform (202k GitHub stars, 60k forks) with built-in AI/LangChain integration for RAG pipelines, semantic caching, and agent memory workflows. n8n's vector store nodes are built on LangChain under the hood.\n\nn8n's existing Redis Vector Store node is incompatible with Valkey. ...
{
"entity_id": "valkey",
"evidence_bounds": {
"files_listing_complete": null,
"patch_selection_truncated": false,
"patch_unavailable_count": 0,
"source_text_truncated": false
},
"published_on": "2026-08-24",
"publisher": "valkey-io/valkey",
"record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
"source_type": "github_issue",
"source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
"sources": [
{
"filename": null,
"kind": "github_body",
"source_id": "body",
"text": "[NEW] Create n8n-nodes-valkey repository for n8n Valkey Vector Store community node\n\n## The problem/use-case that the feature addresses\n\nn8n is an open-source workflow automation platform (202k GitHub stars, 60k forks) with built-in AI/LangChain integration for RAG pipelines, semantic caching, and agent memory workflows. n8n's vector store nodes are built on LangChain under the hood.\n\nn8n's existing Redis Vector Store node is incompatible with Valkey. ...
{
"entity_id": "valkey",
"evidence_bounds": {
"files_listing_complete": true,
"patch_selection_truncated": false,
"patch_unavailable_count": 0,
"source_text_truncated": false
},
"published_on": "2024-12-04",
"publisher": "valkey-io/valkey",
"record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1390",
"source_type": "github_pull_request",
"source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/pull/1390",
"sources": [
{
"filename": null,
"kind": "github_body",
"source_id": "body",
"text": "Update governance and maintainers file for Valkey committers\n\nWe added two more committers, but according to our governance document that makes them TSC members. As we discussed, for now we want to keep the balance of corporate interests, so so updating the governance to explicitly list TSC members compared to folks with just write permissions.\r\n\r\nAlso adds the new new folks with commit permissions."
},
{
"filename": null,
"kind": ...
{
"entity_id": "valkey",
"evidence_bounds": {
"files_listing_complete": true,
"patch_selection_truncated": true,
"patch_unavailable_count": 0,
"source_text_truncated": false
},
"published_on": "2025-02-27",
"publisher": "valkey-io/valkey",
"record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1788",
"source_type": "github_pull_request",
"source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/pull/1788",
"sources": [
{
"filename": null,
"kind": "github_body",
"source_id": "body",
"text": "Consistent look and feel of licenses\n\nUse a consistent set of licenses for Valkey files. I took a look and applied sort of a \"did we make a material change in this file?\" and tried to be conservative in adding the trademark. We could also be liberal as well.\r\n\r\nResolves: https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/1692.\r\n\r\nIncluded documentation about the licensing here: https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/pull/1787.\r\n\r\nLicenses are now also always ...
{
"entity_id": "valkey",
"evidence_bounds": {
"files_listing_complete": true,
"patch_selection_truncated": false,
"patch_unavailable_count": 0,
"source_text_truncated": false
},
"published_on": "2025-12-11",
"publisher": "valkey-io/valkey",
"record_id": "valkey-github-pr-2927",
"source_type": "github_pull_request",
"source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/pull/2927",
"sources": [
{
"filename": null,
"kind": "github_body",
"source_id": "body",
"text": "Refine major decision process and update TSC composition rules\n\n- Add +2 mechanism for technical major decisions\r\n- Define simple-majority voting for non-technical decisions\r\n- Add 1/3 organization limit for TSC membership\r\n- Clarify delegation and governance updates as non-technical decisions"
},
{
"filename": null,
"kind": "github_pr_metadata",
"source_id": "pr_metadata",
"text": "{\"base_sha\": ...
{
"entity_id": "valkey",
"evidence_bounds": {
"files_listing_complete": true,
"patch_selection_truncated": false,
"patch_unavailable_count": 0,
"source_text_truncated": false
},
"published_on": "2024-04-21",
"publisher": "valkey-io/valkey",
"record_id": "valkey-github-pr-345",
"source_type": "github_pull_request",
"source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/pull/345",
"sources": [
{
"filename": null,
"kind": "github_body",
"source_id": "body",
"text": "Initial PR outlining the governance for the project\n\nInitial PR to add a governance doc outlining permissions for the main Valkey project as well as define responsibilities for sub-projects."
},
{
"filename": null,
"kind": "github_pr_metadata",
"source_id": "pr_metadata",
"text": "{\"base_sha\": \"4693aa258e993ebde96f68f608224884e5c8317d\", \"changed_files\": 3, \"draft\": false, \"head_sha\": ...
[ "canonical_ledger_eligible", "full_response_agreement", "luna_a", "luna_b", "provisional_core_agreement", "record_id", "route_reasons", "source_url", "terra_advisory" ]
{
"record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
"luna_a": {
"elapsed_ms": 6430,
"model": "gpt-5.6-luna",
"reasoning_effort": "medium",
"response": {
"affected_scope": "valkey-io/n8n-nodes-valkey repository and n8n Valkey Vector Store community node",
"ambiguity": "The repository and stewardship arrangement are proposed; no implementation evidence is supplied.",
"announced_on": "2026-08-24",
"body_patch_relation": "body_only",
"confidence": 0.98,
"effective_on": null,
"event_kind": "control_rights",
"power_changes": [
{
"actor": "valkey-io",
"change_status": "proposed",
"direction": "added",
"evidence_refs": [
{
"quote": "Hosting under a personal GitHub org — This reduces discoverability and trust. ...
{
"record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1390",
"luna_a": {
"elapsed_ms": 17591,
"model": "gpt-5.6-luna",
"reasoning_effort": "medium",
"response": {
"affected_scope": "Valkey project repositories",
"ambiguity": null,
"announced_on": "2024-12-04",
"body_patch_relation": "consistent",
"confidence": 0.97,
"effective_on": "2024-12-09",
"event_kind": "control_rights",
"power_changes": [
{
"actor": "Harkrishn Patro",
"change_status": "effective",
"direction": "added",
"evidence_refs": [
{
"quote": "We added two more committers",
"source_id": "body"
},
{
"quote": "Committers are defined as individuals with write access to the code within a repository.",
"source_id": "patch:0"
},
{
"quote": "| Harkrishn Patro | [hpatro](https://github.com/hpatro) ...
{
"record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1788",
"luna_a": {
"elapsed_ms": 8370,
"model": "gpt-5.6-luna",
"reasoning_effort": "medium",
"response": {
"affected_scope": "Valkey files",
"ambiguity": "The patch selection is truncated, so omitted changes cannot be assessed; the supplied patches show license-header standardization rather than a demonstrated change in organizational rights.",
"announced_on": "2025-02-27",
"body_patch_relation": "consistent",
"confidence": 0.91,
"effective_on": "2025-02-27",
"event_kind": "license",
"power_changes": [],
"record_class": "control_event",
"title": "Standardized Valkey file license headers"
},
"schema_valid": true,
"validation_errors": []
},
"luna_b": {
"elapsed_ms": 13215,
"model": "gpt-5.6-luna",
"reasoning_effort": "medium",
"response": {
"affected_scope": "Valkey files",
"ambiguity": "The supplied patch selection is truncated; ...
{
"record_id": "valkey-github-pr-2927",
"luna_a": {
"elapsed_ms": 15868,
"model": "gpt-5.6-luna",
"reasoning_effort": "medium",
"response": {
"affected_scope": "Valkey project governance and Technical Steering Committee",
"ambiguity": "The body describes simple-majority voting for non-technical decisions, while the patch specifies a 2/3 threshold for governance major decisions; the merged patch is treated as controlling.",
"announced_on": "2025-12-11",
"body_patch_relation": "patch_supersedes_body",
"confidence": 0.96,
"effective_on": "2025-12-12",
"event_kind": "control_rights",
"power_changes": [
{
"actor": "TSC",
"change_status": "effective",
"direction": "modified",
"evidence_refs": [
{
"quote": "Technical major decisions shall be approved by a simple majority vote whenever one can be obtained.",
"source_id": "patch:0"
...
Your prior review completed with an empty result. Retry ONCE against the exact unchanged scope below. This is a read-only, source-first, performance-blinded adjudication. Do not edit files. You MUST return either (A) a substantive evidence-complete result for every scoped record or (B) an explicit BLOCKED result naming the exact tool/path/error. Never return empty.
Exact records, in frozen order:
Pinned inputs:
Mandatory workflow:
2a62ab05687982c112a29f6126227c26c3ff8defc89ca64662753aaf85c3c0ce cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json 14644759f53071adfe1173d4e25bb01931b8c1591fa8a48295dbd0556a754769 cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json 06d4b3407677fe7fb23046f70164a366db06638e8a29af3daf7661f00d565933 research/oss-governance-coding-protocol-v1.2.md bfc735a7d8602d1f236a88c2d23b195f0600a8bae86fb8c8936afe7883a41b8e schema/governance-coding-v1.schema.json 6181f5cb60a0462f83be00be301763daa89f11581e68ee1c46a84e8bf4e5be31 schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json
The five frozen source envelopes and all three direct coder responses are now inspected in the required order. I am constructing the five-row fragment, then I will run the repository’s fragment validator without modifying repository files.
No files found
Found 4 matches /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/tests/test_governance_adjudication.py: Line 23: validate_adjudication_fragment, Line 986: assert validate_adjudication_fragment(fragment, documents, coding_package, schema) == [] Line 998: errors = validate_adjudication_fragment(fragment, documents, coding_package, schema) /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py: Line 659: def validate_adjudication_fragment(
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
600: errors.extend(
601: _validate_record(
602: record,
603: documents_by_id[record_id],
604: coding_by_id[record_id],
605: reviewer_ids,
606: )
607: )
608:
609: decisions = Counter(
610: record.get("decision")
611: for record in adjudication_rows
612: if isinstance(record, dict) and record.get("decision") in DECISIONS
613: )
614: classes = Counter(
615: record["final_coding"]["record_class"]
616: for record in adjudication_rows
617: if isinstance(record, dict)
618: and isinstance(record.get("final_coding"), dict)
619: and isinstance(record["final_coding"].get("record_class"), str)
620: )
621: unresolved = [
622: record.get("record_id")
623: for record in adjudication_rows
624: if isinstance(record, dict) and record.get("decision") == "abstain"
625: ]
626: record_decisions = [
627: {
628: ...
Found 14 matches
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py:
Line 344: def _validate_record(
Line 402: accepted_from = record.get("accepted_from")
Line 404: if decision == "accept":
Line 405: if accepted_from not in RESPONSE_SOURCES:
Line 406: errors.append(f"{prefix}: accept requires accepted_from")
Line 408: accepted = _response_for(coding_record, accepted_from)
Line 410: errors.append(f"{prefix}: {accepted_from} is not a valid frozen response")
Line 412: errors.append(f"{prefix}: accepted coding does not equal {accepted_from}")
Line 413: elif accepted_from is not None:
Line 414: errors.append(f"{prefix}: only accept may set accepted_from")
Line 439: decision == "reject"
Line 492: if decision == "abstain":
Line 501: if decision == "accept" and basis != accepted_from:
Line 502: errors.append(f"{prefix}: accept revision basis must equal accepted_from")
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
260: return sources
261:
262:
263: def _evidence_errors(
264: reference: Any,
265: sources: dict[str, str],
266: path: str,
267: *,
268: claim: bool = False,
269: ) -> list[str]:
270: if not isinstance(reference, dict):
271: return [f"{path} must be an object"]
272: required = {"source_id", "quote", "field"} if claim else {"source_id", "quote"}
273: if set(reference) != required:
274: return [f"{path} must contain exactly {sorted(required)}"]
275: if claim and reference.get("field") not in CLAIM_FIELDS:
276: return [f"{path}.field is invalid"]
277: source_id = reference.get("source_id")
278: quote = reference.get("quote")
279: if not isinstance(source_id, str) or not source_id:
280: return [f"{path}.source_id must be a non-empty string"]
281: if source_id not in sources:
282: return [f"{path}.source_id is not present in the ...
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/uv.lock /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/pyproject.toml
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: from __future__ import annotations
2:
3: import argparse
4: import hashlib
5: import io
6: import json
7: import os
8: import stat
9: import tempfile
10: import zipfile
11: from collections import Counter
12: from contextlib import suppress
13: from dataclasses import dataclass
14: from pathlib import Path
15: from typing import Any
16:
17: from jsonschema import Draft202012Validator, FormatChecker
18:
19: from institution_lab.governance_coding import validate_response
20:
21: DECISIONS = {"accept", "revise", "reject", "abstain"}
22: INSTITUTIONAL_CLASSES = {
23: "effective_institutional_change",
24: "announced_institutional_change",
25: "proposal_only",
26: }
27: REVIEWER_TYPES = {"human", "llm", "human_llm_assisted"}
28: REVIEWER_ROLES = {"source_adjudicator", "evidence_auditor", "synthesizer"}
29: RESPONSE_SOURCES = {"luna_a", "luna_b", ...
Found 16 matches
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_coding.py:
Line 70: "record_class",
Line 77: "power_changes",
Line 241: def validate_response(response: dict[str, Any], document: dict[str, Any]) -> list[str]:
Line 245: record_class = response.get("record_class")
Line 246: if record_class not in RECORD_CLASSES:
Line 247: errors.append("record_class is not allowed")
Line 273: changes = response.get("power_changes")
Line 275: errors.append("power_changes must be an array")
Line 278: prefix = f"power_changes[{index}]"
Line 304: institutional = record_class in {
Line 310: errors.append("institutional/proposal records require power_changes")
Line 312: errors.append("non-institutional records must not contain power_changes")
Line 313: if record_class == "abstain" and response.get("ambiguity") is None:
Line 381: for edge in ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_coding.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
230: if candidate.startswith("```"):
231: lines = candidate.splitlines()
232: if len(lines) < 3 or lines[-1].strip() != "```":
233: raise ValueError("unterminated JSON code fence")
234: candidate = "\n".join(lines[1:-1]).strip()
235: value = json.loads(candidate)
236: if not isinstance(value, dict):
237: raise ValueError("response must be an object")
238: return value
239:
240:
241: def validate_response(response: dict[str, Any], document: dict[str, Any]) -> list[str]:
242: errors: list[str] = []
243: if set(response) != RESPONSE_KEYS:
244: errors.append("response has missing or unexpected keys")
245: record_class = response.get("record_class")
246: if record_class not in RECORD_CLASSES:
247: errors.append("record_class is not allowed")
248: kind = ...
The five frozen source envelopes are complete. I am now comparing only the three direct coder responses for each record, then I will derive and schema-check the five final rows without editing the repository.
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "in_progress",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
}
]
[
{
"record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
"luna_a": {
"elapsed_ms": 6430,
"model": "gpt-5.6-luna",
"reasoning_effort": "medium",
"response": {
"affected_scope": "valkey-io/n8n-nodes-valkey repository and n8n Valkey Vector Store community node",
"ambiguity": "The repository and stewardship arrangement are proposed; no implementation evidence is supplied.",
"announced_on": "2026-08-24",
"body_patch_relation": "body_only",
"confidence": 0.98,
"effective_on": null,
"event_kind": "control_rights",
"power_changes": [
{
"actor": "valkey-io",
"change_status": "proposed",
"direction": "added",
"evidence_refs": [
{
"quote": "Hosting under a personal GitHub org — This reduces discoverability and trust. ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: {
2: "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
3: "$id": "https://institutional-transition-lab.local/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json",
4: "title": "Performance-blinded governance adjudication v1",
5: "type": "object",
6: "additionalProperties": false,
7: "required": [
8: "schema_version",
9: "adjudication_id",
10: "design_status",
11: "transition_dates_excluded",
12: "outcome_data_used",
13: "inputs",
14: "reviewers",
15: "records"
16: ],
17: "properties": {
18: "schema_version": {"const": 1},
19: "adjudication_id": {"type": "string", "minLength": 1},
20: "design_status": {
21: "const": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication"
22: },
23: "transition_dates_excluded": {"const": true},
24: "outcome_data_used": {"const": false},
25: ...
Found 2 matches /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/research/oss-governance-coding-protocol-v1.2.md: Line 4: Status: pre-adjudication evaluator correction; model-informed development protocol Line 15: V1.2 corrects the evaluator before any source adjudication or canonical graph
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/research/oss-governance-coding-protocol-v1.2.md</path> <type>file</type> <content> 1: # Performance-blinded OSS governance coding protocol v1.2 2: 3: Date frozen: 2026-08-27 4: Status: pre-adjudication evaluator correction; model-informed development protocol 5: 6: ## Correction 7: 8: The V1.1 run used the intended frozen 40-record manifest and unchanged coders. 9: Its mandatory artifact audit found that the evaluator's field named “strict 10: edge agreement” compared actor, right, target, direction, and status but omitted 11: edge scope and evidence references. It also did not route disagreements in the 12: separately coded body/patch relationship. Six records were consequently called 13: `provisional_exact_agreement` despite material differences. 14: 15: V1.2 corrects the evaluator before any source adjudication or canonical graph 16: construction: 17: 18: - strict edge signatures now include scope and the complete grounded ...
The coder comparison exposes three material errors: the repository proposal mistakes stewardship language for institutional authority, the committer PR overstates the maintainer-definition edit as a newly granted governance right, and the license PR’s retained patches are sufficient for a narrow control-event finding despite truncation. I am resolving those independently from the frozen source text and using a coder baseline only to calculate each required graph diff.
Found 5 matches /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json: Line 1422: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509", Line 1444: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1390", Line 1484: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1788", Line 1632: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-2927", Line 1666: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-345",
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1410: ]
1411: },
1412: {
1413: "entity_id": "valkey",
1414: "evidence_bounds": {
1415: "files_listing_complete": null,
1416: "patch_selection_truncated": false,
1417: "patch_unavailable_count": 0,
1418: "source_text_truncated": false
1419: },
1420: "published_on": "2026-08-24",
1421: "publisher": "valkey-io/valkey",
1422: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
1423: "source_type": "github_issue",
1424: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
1425: "sources": [
1426: {
1427: "filename": null,
1428: "kind": "github_body",
1429: "source_id": "body",
1430: "text": "[NEW] Create n8n-nodes-valkey repository for n8n Valkey Vector Store community node\n\n## The problem/use-case ...
["body",null,"Refine major decision process and update TSC composition rules\n\n- Add +2 mechanism for technical major decisions\r\n- Define simple-majority voting for non-technical decisions\r\n- Add 1/3 organization limit for TSC membership\r\n- Clarify delegation and governance updates as non-technical decisions"]
["pr_metadata",null,"{\"base_sha\": \"5940dbfb0b601dfc565ca7f349a3a62f67d7e5ed\", \"changed_files\": 1, \"draft\": false, \"head_sha\": \"8d92a6e1392df217d841b869f581aa0c49542cb2\", \"merge_commit_sha\": \"cd6faaa726791447f7adc196b6c77cc20658112d\", \"merged\": true, \"merged_at\": \"2025-12-12T16:53:50Z\", \"state\": \"closed\"}"]
["patch:0","GOVERNANCE.md","@@ -4,18 +4,23 @@ The Valkey project is managed by a Technical Steering Committee (TSC) composed o\n The Valkey project includes all of the current and future repositories under the Valkey-io organization.\n Committers are defined as individuals with write access to the code within a repository.\n Maintainers are ...
["body",null,"Initial PR outlining the governance for the project\n\nInitial PR to add a governance doc outlining permissions for the main Valkey project as well as define responsibilities for sub-projects."]
["pr_metadata",null,"{\"base_sha\": \"4693aa258e993ebde96f68f608224884e5c8317d\", \"changed_files\": 3, \"draft\": false, \"head_sha\": \"8cb7eae5919fe42da841aec43df0b5f5b58e7f37\", \"merge_commit_sha\": \"b283c6b508792892d76b9a4911e3086e37518748\", \"merged\": true, \"merged_at\": \"2024-04-30T21:57:21Z\", \"state\": \"closed\"}"]
["patch:0","GOVERNANCE.md","@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@\n+# Project Governance\n+\n+The Valkey project is managed by a Technical Steering Committee (TSC) composed of the maintainers of the Valkey repository.\n+The Valkey project includes all of the current and future repositories under the Valkey-io organization.\n+Maintainers are defined as individuals with full commit access to a repository, which shall be in sync with the MAINTAINERS.md file in a given ...
I have completed the source and coder comparisons. The remaining work is to assemble the five adjudication rows, run the repository’s exact fragment validator, and return the validated object with the pinned hashes.
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "in_progress",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
}
]
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
320: required = {"reviewer_id", "reviewer_type", "model", "role", "assistance"}
321: errors = []
322: if set(reviewer) != required:
323: errors.append(f"{path} must contain exactly {sorted(required)}")
324: if not isinstance(reviewer.get("reviewer_id"), str) or not reviewer.get("reviewer_id"):
325: errors.append(f"{path}.reviewer_id must be a non-empty string")
326: if reviewer.get("reviewer_type") not in REVIEWER_TYPES:
327: errors.append(f"{path}.reviewer_type is invalid")
328: if reviewer.get("role") not in REVIEWER_ROLES:
329: errors.append(f"{path}.role is invalid")
330: if not isinstance(reviewer.get("assistance"), str) or not reviewer.get("assistance"):
331: errors.append(f"{path}.assistance must be a non-empty string")
332: model = reviewer.get("model")
333: if reviewer.get("reviewer_type") == "human" and model is not None:
334: ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
743: for record in fragment_rows:
744: if not isinstance(record, dict):
745: errors.append("adjudication record must be an object")
746: continue
747: record_id = record.get("record_id")
748: if not isinstance(record_id, str):
749: continue
750: if record_id not in documents_by_id or record_id not in coding_by_id:
751: continue
752: listed_reviewers = record.get("reviewer_ids")
753: if not isinstance(listed_reviewers, list) or not any(
754: isinstance(reviewer_id, str)
755: and reviewer_roles.get(reviewer_id) == "source_adjudicator"
756: for reviewer_id in listed_reviewers
757: ):
758: errors.append(f"record {record_id}: requires a source_adjudicator")
759: errors.extend(
760: _validate_record(
761: record,
762: documents_by_id[record_id],
763: coding_by_id[record_id],
764: reviewer_ids,
765: ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
250: for source in document.get("sources", [])
251: if isinstance(source, dict)
252: and isinstance(source.get("source_id"), str)
253: and isinstance(source.get("text"), str)
254: }
255: metadata = {
256: field: document.get(field)
257: for field in ("record_id", "source_url", "published_on", "publisher", "source_type")
258: }
259: sources["record_metadata"] = json.dumps(metadata, sort_keys=True, separators=(",", ":"))
260: return sources
261:
262:
263: def _evidence_errors(
264: reference: Any,
265: sources: dict[str, str],
266: path: str,
267: *,
268: claim: bool = False,
269: ) -> list[str]:
270: if not isinstance(reference, dict):
271: return [f"{path} must be an object"]
272: required = {"source_id", "quote", "field"} if claim else {"source_id", "quote"}
273: if set(reference) != required:
274: return [f"{path} must ...
[NEW] Create n8n-nodes-valkey repository for n8n Valkey Vector Store community node ## The problem/use-case that the feature addresses n8n is an open-source workflow automation platform (202k GitHub stars, 60k forks) with built-in AI/LangChain integration for RAG pipelines, semantic caching, and agent memory workflows. n8n's vector store nodes are built on LangChain under the hood. n8n's existing Redis Vector Store node is incompatible with Valkey. When users connect to AWS ElastiCache with Valkey, document insertion operations fail because the node attempts to create a TEXT field that Valkey's search module does not support in the same way as Redis Stack. The n8n team has explicitly stated they will not fix this compatibility gap: - [Issue #21361](https://github.com/n8n-io/n8n/issues/21361) - Closed with label "closed:enhancement/feature" - [Community forum response](https://community.n8n.io/t/redis-vector-store-node/213678/2): "the Redis Vector Store node is simply not ...
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "in_progress",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
}
]
The final adjudications resolve three recurring errors: product stewardship language does not create institutional authority, role definitions do not retroactively grant rights, and complete retained license patches support a narrow control-event finding. I am now materializing the exact five-row payload in /tmp/opencode, then I will run validate_adjudication_fragment against the pinned frozen inputs.
Found 10 matches /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json: Line 3179: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509", Line 3358: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1390", Line 3476: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1788", Line 3676: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-2927", Line 3940: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-345", /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json: Line 1422: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509", Line 1444: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1390", Line 1484: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-1788", Line 1632: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-2927", Line 1666: "record_id": "valkey-github-pr-345",
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1422: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
1423: "source_type": "github_issue",
1424: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
1425: "sources": [
1426: {
1427: "filename": null,
1428: "kind": "github_body",
1429: "source_id": "body",
1430: "text": "[NEW] Create n8n-nodes-valkey repository for n8n Valkey Vector Store community node\n\n## The problem/use-case that the feature addresses\n\nn8n is an open-source workflow automation platform (202k GitHub stars, 60k forks) with built-in AI/LangChain integration for RAG pipelines, semantic caching, and agent memory workflows. n8n's vector store nodes are built on LangChain under the hood.\n\nn8n's existing Redis Vector Store node is incompatible with Valkey. ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
3170: }
3171: ],
3172: "record_class": "proposal_only",
3173: "title": "Create valkey-io/n8n-nodes-valkey repository"
3174: },
3175: "schema_valid": true,
3176: "validation_errors": []
3177: },
3178: "provisional_core_agreement": false,
3179: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
3180: "route_reasons": [
3181: "class_disagreement",
3182: "edge_disagreement",
3183: "invalid_response"
3184: ],
3185: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
3186: "terra_advisory": {
3187: "elapsed_ms": 4756,
3188: "model": "gpt-5.6-terra",
3189: "reasoning_effort": "xhigh",
3190: "response": {
3191: "affected_scope": "n8n-nodes-valkey community node ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
3090: "scope": "hosting and community maintenance through a proposed valkey-io repository",
3091: "target": "`@langchain/valkey` NPM package"
3092: }
3093: ],
3094: "record_class": "proposal_only",
3095: "title": "Create langchain-valkey repository for LangChainJS vector store integration"
3096: },
3097: "schema_valid": true,
3098: "validation_errors": []
3099: }
3100: },
3101: {
3102: "canonical_ledger_eligible": false,
3103: "full_response_agreement": false,
3104: "luna_a": {
3105: "elapsed_ms": 6430,
3106: "model": "gpt-5.6-luna",
3107: "reasoning_effort": "medium",
3108: "response": {
3109: "affected_scope": "valkey-io/n8n-nodes-valkey repository and n8n Valkey ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
3360: "edge_disagreement"
3361: ],
3362: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/pull/1390",
3363: "terra_advisory": {
3364: "elapsed_ms": 25966,
3365: "model": "gpt-5.6-terra",
3366: "reasoning_effort": "xhigh",
3367: "response": {
3368: "affected_scope": "Valkey project repositories",
3369: "ambiguity": "The patch distinguishes committers from maintainers but does not explicitly state which existing governance rights, if any, were removed from other individuals.",
3370: "announced_on": "2024-12-04",
3371: "body_patch_relation": "consistent",
3372: "confidence": 0.88,
3373: "effective_on": "2024-12-09",
3374: "event_kind": "control_rights",
3375: "power_changes": [
3376: ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
3683: "terra_advisory": {
3684: "elapsed_ms": 50960,
3685: "model": "gpt-5.6-terra",
3686: "reasoning_effort": "xhigh",
3687: "response": {
3688: "affected_scope": "TSC membership and decision processes for the Valkey project",
3689: "ambiguity": "The PR body describes governance updates as \u201cnon-technical decisions,\u201d while the merged patch classifies them as Governance Major Decisions; coding follows the merged implementing patch.",
3690: "announced_on": "2025-12-11",
3691: "body_patch_relation": "patch_supersedes_body",
3692: "confidence": 0.92,
3693: "effective_on": "2025-12-12",
3694: "event_kind": "board_or_steering",
3695: "power_changes": [
3696: {
3697: "actor": "TSC",
3698: ...
@@ -4,18 +4,23 @@ The Valkey project is managed by a Technical Steering Committee (TSC) composed o The Valkey project includes all of the current and future repositories under the Valkey-io organization. Committers are defined as individuals with write access to the code within a repository. Maintainers are defined as individuals with full access to a repository and own its governance. -Both maintainers and committers should be clearly listed in the MAINTAINERS.md file in a given projects repository. +Both maintainers and committers shall be clearly listed in the MAINTAINERS.md file in a given project's repository. Maintainers of other repositories within the Valkey project are not members of the TSC unless explicitly added. ## Technical Steering Committee The TSC is responsible for oversight of all technical, project, approval, and policy matters for Valkey. The TSC members are listed in the [MAINTAINERS.md](MAINTAINERS.md) file in the Valkey repository. ...
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +# Project Governance + +The Valkey project is managed by a Technical Steering Committee (TSC) composed of the maintainers of the Valkey repository. +The Valkey project includes all of the current and future repositories under the Valkey-io organization. +Maintainers are defined as individuals with full commit access to a repository, which shall be in sync with the MAINTAINERS.md file in a given projects repository. +Maintainers of other repositories within the Valkey project are not members of the TSC unless explicitly added. + +## Technical Steering Committee + +The TSC is responsible for oversight of all technical, project, approval, and policy matters for Valkey. + +The TSC members are listed in the [MAINTAINERS.md](MAINTAINERS.md) file in the Valkey repository. +Maintainers (and accordingly, TSC members) may be added or removed by no less than 2/3 affirmative vote of the current TSC. +The TSC shall appoint a Chair responsible for organizing TSC meetings. ...
Found 6 matches
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json:
Line 235: "rationale", "evidence_limitations", "unresolved_reason",
Line 236: "claim_evidence_refs", "final_coding", "graph_edge_revision"
Line 255: "evidence_limitations": {"type": ["string", "null"], "minLength": 1},
Line 256: "unresolved_reason": {"type": ["string", "null"], "minLength": 1},
Line 257: "claim_evidence_refs": {
Line 264: "graph_edge_revision": {
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
220: "source_ids": {
221: "type": "array",
222: "minItems": 1,
223: "uniqueItems": true,
224: "items": {"type": "string", "minLength": 1}
225: },
226: "evidence_bounds": {"$ref": "#/$defs/evidence_bounds"}
227: }
228: },
229: "record": {
230: "type": "object",
231: "additionalProperties": false,
232: "required": [
233: "record_id", "source_url", "decision", "accepted_from", "reviewer_ids",
234: "source_audit",
235: "rationale", "evidence_limitations", "unresolved_reason",
236: "claim_evidence_refs", "final_coding", "graph_edge_revision"
237: ],
238: "properties": {
239: "record_id": {"type": "string", "minLength": 1},
240: "source_url": {
241: "type": "string",
242: "format": ...
{
"files_listing_complete": null,
"patch_selection_truncated": false,
"patch_unavailable_count": 0,
"source_text_truncated": false
}
[
"body"
]
Found 51 matches /home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/research/session-handover-2026-08-27.md: Line 18: are development evidence awaiting source-level adjudication. Line 37: 4. **Require grounded evidence.** Every accepted event, date, actor, and right Line 40: ambiguous, abstained, announced, and effective claims. Unknown values must Line 44: source-level adjudication can authorize a canonical graph diff. Line 60: - Robustness acceptance requires at least 60% support across at least 20 Line 147: | Routed to adjudication | 35/40 | Line 173: quote and was quarantined; accepted evidence remained 100% grounded and run Line 179: The two explicit Luna coders, Terra advisory route, 35 adjudication records, Line 182: adjudication gate. ...
Found 30 matches
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json:
Line 236: "claim_evidence_refs", "final_coding", "graph_edge_revision"
Line 257: "claim_evidence_refs": {
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/fragments/valkey-31-33.json:
Line 37: "claim_evidence_refs": [
Line 95: "claim_evidence_refs": [
Line 183: "claim_evidence_refs": [
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/fragments/terraform-c.json:
Line 39: "claim_evidence_refs": [
Line 141: "claim_evidence_refs": [
Line 268: "claim_evidence_refs": [
Line 400: "claim_evidence_refs": [
Line 496: "claim_evidence_refs": [
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/fragments/opentofu-10-18.json:
Line 41: "claim_evidence_refs": [
Line 118: ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/fragments/valkey-31-33.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: {
2: "schema_version": 1,
3: "design_status": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication",
4: "reviewers": [
5: {
6: "reviewer_id": "opencode-sol-valkey-issues-a1",
7: "reviewer_type": "llm",
8: "model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
9: "role": "source_adjudicator",
10: "assistance": "Source-first review of three frozen Valkey issue records"
11: }
12: ],
13: "records": [
14: {
15: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-2961",
16: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/2961",
17: "decision": "revise",
18: "accepted_from": null,
19: "reviewer_ids": [
20: "opencode-sol-valkey-issues-a1"
21: ],
22: "source_audit": {
23: "inspected_before_codings": true,
24: "source_ids": [
25: "body"
26: ...
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/fragments/valkey-34-35.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: {
2: "schema_version": 1,
3: "design_status": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication",
4: "reviewers": [
5: {
6: "reviewer_id": "opencode-sol-valkey-a2",
7: "reviewer_type": "llm",
8: "model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
9: "role": "source_adjudicator",
10: "assistance": "Source-first review of two frozen Valkey records"
11: }
12: ],
13: "records": [
14: {
15: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4276",
16: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4276",
17: "decision": "abstain",
18: "accepted_from": null,
19: "reviewer_ids": [
20: "opencode-sol-valkey-a2"
21: ],
22: "source_audit": {
23: "inspected_before_codings": true,
24: "source_ids": [
25: "body"
26: ],
27: ...
Found 16 matches
/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py:
Line 659: def validate_adjudication_fragment(
Line 660: fragment: dict[str, Any],
Line 665: fragment_schema = {
Line 688: errors = validate_against_schema(fragment, fragment_schema)
Line 689: reviewers = fragment.get("reviewers", [])
Line 710: fragment_rows = fragment.get("records", [])
Line 711: if not all(isinstance(rows, list) for rows in (document_rows, coding_rows, fragment_rows)):
Line 712: errors.append("documents, coding package, and fragment records must be arrays")
Line 716: fragment_ids = [
Line 718: for row in fragment_rows
Line 725: if _duplicates(fragment_ids):
Line 726: errors.append("fragment record IDs must be unique")
Line 727: expected_fragment_ids = [record_id for record_id in document_ids if record_id in fragment_ids]
Line 728: if len(fragment_ids) != len(fragment_rows) or fragment_ids != ...
drwxr-xr-x 3 byk byk 4096 Sep 9 01:18 /tmp/opencode
The final rows will keep only source-proven authority changes: repository placement remains a product proposal, the committer PR retains only the two explicit write grants, and the TSC-rule revision adds the omitted +2 approval path. I am assembling the exact fragment now, with the licensing conclusion limited to the retained patches and its truncation recorded.
[NEW] Create n8n-nodes-valkey repository for n8n Valkey Vector Store community node ## The problem/use-case that the feature addresses n8n is an open-source workflow automation platform (202k GitHub stars, 60k forks) with built-in AI/LangChain integration for RAG pipelines, semantic caching, and agent memory workflows. n8n's vector store nodes are built on LangChain under the hood. n8n's existing Redis Vector Store node is incompatible with Valkey. When users connect to AWS ElastiCache with Valkey, document insertion operations fail because the node attempts to create a TEXT field that Valkey's search module does not support in the same way as Redis Stack. The n8n team has explicitly stated they will not fix this compatibility gap: - [Issue #21361](https://github.com/n8n-io/n8n/issues/21361) - Closed with label "closed:enhancement/feature" - [Community forum response](https://community.n8n.io/t/redis-vector-store-node/213678/2): "the Redis Vector Store node is simply not ...
Success. Updated the following files: A ../../../../tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json
<path>/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
650: "unresolved_record_ids": unresolved,
651: "record_decisions": record_decisions,
652: "graph_edge_revisions": graph_edge_revisions,
653: "reviewer_provenance": reviewers,
654: "canonicalization_gate": "closed" if errors or unresolved else "open",
655: }
656: return errors, summary
657:
658:
659: def validate_adjudication_fragment(
660: fragment: dict[str, Any],
661: documents: dict[str, Any],
662: coding_package: dict[str, Any],
663: schema: dict[str, Any],
664: ) -> list[str]:
665: fragment_schema = {
666: "$schema": schema.get("$schema"),
667: "type": "object",
668: "additionalProperties": False,
669: "required": ["schema_version", "design_status", "reviewers", "records"],
670: "properties": {
671: "schema_version": {"const": 1},
672: "design_status": {
673: "const": ...
[ "record valkey-github-pr-2927: graph_edge_revision.added is not derived", "record valkey-github-pr-2927: graph_edge_revision.removed is not derived" ]
The validator accepted every source, quote, coding field, and row except the declared graph diff for PR 2927. That mismatch comes from exact edge identity and ordering, not the adjudication; I am replacing the hand-derived lists with the validator’s canonical diff and rerunning the full check.
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "in_progress",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
}
]
{
"added": [
{
"actor": "TSC",
"change_status": "effective",
"direction": "added",
"evidence_refs": [
{
"quote": "If a simple majority cannot be reached within a two-week voting period, and no TSC member has voted against, the decision may instead be approved through explicit “+2” support from at least two TSC members, recorded on the relevant issue or pull request.",
"source_id": "patch:0"
},
{
"quote": "If any TSC member casts a negative vote, the decision must follow the simple majority voting process and cannot be approved through +2.",
"source_id": "patch:0"
}
],
"right_kind": "approve",
"scope": "technical major decisions lacking a simple majority after two weeks and receiving no negative TSC vote",
"target": "technical major decisions"
},
{
"actor": "TSC",
"change_status": "effective",
"direction": "modified",
...
Found 61 matches
/tmp/opencode/institutional-transition-adjudication-9642983578/v1.2-preliminary-package.json:
Line 539: "right_kind": "remove",
Line 615: "right_kind": "remove",
Line 2625: "right_kind": "set_membership",
Line 2639: "right_kind": "remove",
Line 2729: "right_kind": "remove",
Line 2775: "right_kind": "set_membership",
Line 2851: "right_kind": "set_membership",
/tmp/opencode/adjudication-records-final.json:
Line 26: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 27: "basis": "luna_a",
Line 107: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 108: "basis": "luna_a",
Line 196: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 331: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 443: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 582: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 612: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 642: "graph_edge_revision": {
Line 737: "graph_edge_revision": {
...
<path>/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
490: "quote": "Delegation of decision making for a project is considered a [Governance Major Decision](#governance-major-decisions).",
491: "source_id": "patch:0"
492: }
493: ],
494: "right_kind": "delegate",
495: "scope": "other projects within the Valkey organization, subject to Governance Major Decision approval",
496: "target": "decision making for other projects within the Valkey organization"
497: }
498: ],
499: "confidence": 0.98,
500: "ambiguity": "The PR body describes simple-majority voting for non-technical decisions, while the merged patch requires a 2/3 vote for Governance Major Decisions; the merged patch controls."
501: },
502: "graph_edge_revision": {
503: "basis": "luna_a",
504: "added": [
505: {
506: "actor": "TSC",
507: ...
Success. Updated the following files: M ../../../../tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json
[ "record valkey-github-pr-2927: graph_edge_revision.added is not derived" ]
<path>/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
500: "quote": "The TSC may delegate decision making for other projects within the Valkey organization to the maintainers responsible for those projects.",
501: "source_id": "patch:0"
502: },
503: {
504: "quote": "Delegation of decision making for a project is considered a [Governance Major Decision](#governance-major-decisions).",
505: "source_id": "patch:0"
506: }
507: ],
508: "right_kind": "delegate",
509: "scope": "other projects within the Valkey organization, subject to Governance Major Decision approval",
510: "target": "decision making for other projects within the Valkey organization"
511: }
512: ],
513: "confidence": 0.98,
514: "ambiguity": "The PR body describes simple-majority voting for non-technical decisions, while ...
<path>/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
420: "evidence_refs": [
421: {
422: "quote": "If a simple majority cannot be reached within a two-week voting period, and no TSC member has voted against, the decision may instead be approved through explicit “+2” support from at least two TSC members, recorded on the relevant issue or pull request.",
423: "source_id": "patch:0"
424: },
425: {
426: "quote": "If any TSC member casts a negative vote, the decision must follow the simple majority voting process and cannot be approved through +2.",
427: "source_id": "patch:0"
428: }
429: ],
430: "right_kind": "approve",
431: "scope": "technical major decisions lacking a simple majority after two weeks and receiving no negative TSC vote",
432: "target": "technical major decisions"
433: ...
Success. Updated the following files: M ../../../../tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json
[ "record valkey-github-pr-2927: graph_edge_revision.added is not derived" ]
4 3
False
[
{
"actor": "TSC",
"change_status": "effective",
"direction": "added",
"evidence_refs": [
{
"quote": "If a simple majority cannot be reached within a two-week voting period, and no TSC member has voted against, the decision may instead be approved through explicit “+2” support from at least two TSC members, recorded on the relevant issue or pull request.",
"source_id": "patch:0"
},
{
"quote": "If any TSC member casts a negative vote, the decision must follow the simple majority voting process and cannot be approved through +2.",
"source_id": "patch:0"
}
],
"right_kind": "approve",
"scope": "technical major decisions lacking a simple majority after two weeks and receiving no negative TSC vote",
"target": "technical major decisions"
},
{
"actor": "TSC",
"change_status": "effective",
"direction": "modified",
"evidence_refs": [
{
"quote": "* Involuntary ...
<path>/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
510: "target": "decision making for other projects within the Valkey organization"
511: }
512: ],
513: "confidence": 0.98,
514: "ambiguity": "The PR body describes simple-majority voting for non-technical decisions, while the merged patch requires a 2/3 vote for Governance Major Decisions; the merged patch controls."
515: },
516: "graph_edge_revision": {
517: "basis": "luna_a",
518: "added": [
519: {
520: "actor": "TSC",
521: "change_status": "effective",
522: "direction": "added",
523: "evidence_refs": [
524: {
525: "quote": "If a simple majority cannot be reached within a two-week voting period, and no TSC member has voted against, the decision may instead be approved through explicit “+2” support from at least two TSC members, recorded on the relevant ...
<path>/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
390: "quote": "Governance major decisions shall require approval by a 2/3 affirmative vote of the entire TSC."
391: }
392: ],
393: "final_coding": {
394: "record_class": "effective_institutional_change",
395: "event_kind": "board_or_steering",
396: "title": "Valkey TSC membership and major-decision rules revised",
397: "announced_on": "2025-12-11",
398: "effective_on": "2025-12-12",
399: "affected_scope": "Valkey Technical Steering Committee membership and major-decision procedures",
400: "body_patch_relation": "patch_supersedes_body",
401: "power_changes": [
402: {
403: "actor": "TSC",
404: "change_status": "effective",
405: "direction": "modified",
406: "evidence_refs": [
407: {
408: "quote": "Technical major decisions shall be ...
The first correction inserted the missing removal edge into the final coding instead of its diff, creating a duplicate. I found the exact placement error; I am removing the duplicate and making the graph revision byte-for-byte equal to graph_edge_diff.
Success. Updated the following files: M ../../../../tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json
[]
The five-row fragment now passes validate_adjudication_fragment with the exact result []. I am doing the final pin check and will return the validated payload unchanged, followed by the command and hash evidence.
2a62ab05687982c112a29f6126227c26c3ff8defc89ca64662753aaf85c3c0ce cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json 14644759f53071adfe1173d4e25bb01931b8c1591fa8a48295dbd0556a754769 cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json 06d4b3407677fe7fb23046f70164a366db06638e8a29af3daf7661f00d565933 research/oss-governance-coding-protocol-v1.2.md bfc735a7d8602d1f236a88c2d23b195f0600a8bae86fb8c8936afe7883a41b8e schema/governance-coding-v1.schema.json 6181f5cb60a0462f83be00be301763daa89f11581e68ee1c46a84e8bf4e5be31 schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json
{
"schema_version": 1,
"design_status": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication",
"reviewers": [
{
"reviewer_id": "opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b",
"reviewer_type": "llm",
"model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
"role": "source_adjudicator",
"assistance": "Independent source-first adjudication of Valkey records 36-40"
}
],
"records": [
{
"record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
"source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
"decision": "reject",
"accepted_from": null,
"reviewer_ids": [
"opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b"
],
"source_audit": {
"inspected_before_codings": true,
"source_ids": [
"body"
],
"evidence_bounds": {
"files_listing_complete": null,
"patch_selection_truncated": false,
"patch_unavailable_count": 0,
"source_text_truncated": false
}
},
"rationale": ...
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "in_progress",
"priority": "high"
}
]
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
}
]
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "in_progress",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "pending",
"priority": "high"
}
]
A final semantic pass found two improvements before publication: PR 345’s body and patch are consistent, so Luna B can be accepted exactly; PR 2927’s diff should not include cosmetic scope/evidence changes. I am applying those minimal corrections, adding the missing field-level citations for the non-institutional rows, and rerunning the validator.
Success. Updated the following files: M ../../../../tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json
[]
<path>/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: {
2: "schema_version": 1,
3: "design_status": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication",
4: "reviewers": [
5: {
6: "reviewer_id": "opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b",
7: "reviewer_type": "llm",
8: "model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
9: "role": "source_adjudicator",
10: "assistance": "Independent source-first adjudication of Valkey records 36-40"
11: }
12: ],
13: "records": [
14: {
15: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
16: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
17: "decision": "reject",
18: "accepted_from": null,
19: "reviewer_ids": [
20: "opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b"
21: ],
22: "source_audit": {
23: "inspected_before_codings": true,
24: "source_ids": [
25: "body"
26: ],
27: "evidence_bounds": {
28: ...
The schema check proves structural validity, but the final source audit still governs. PR 345’s TSC-creation patch also grants broad oversight of technical, project, approval, and policy matters; Luna B’s five-edge response omits that express authority, so accepting it would violate the complete-edge requirement. I am restoring revise, adding only that grounded edge, and validating the derived diff.
Success. Updated the following files: M ../../../../tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json
[]
<path>/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: {
2: "schema_version": 1,
3: "design_status": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication",
4: "reviewers": [
5: {
6: "reviewer_id": "opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b",
7: "reviewer_type": "llm",
8: "model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
9: "role": "source_adjudicator",
10: "assistance": "Independent source-first adjudication of Valkey records 36-40"
11: }
12: ],
13: "records": [
14: {
15: "record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
16: "source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
17: "decision": "reject",
18: "accepted_from": null,
19: "reviewer_ids": [
20: "opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b"
21: ],
22: "source_audit": {
23: "inspected_before_codings": true,
24: "source_ids": [
25: "body"
26: ],
27: "evidence_bounds": {
28: ...
[
{
"content": "Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Validate the five-record adjudication fragment against frozen inputs and schema",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
},
{
"content": "Return one substantive response with reviewer provenance and all five decisions",
"status": "completed",
"priority": "high"
}
]
Verification Pinned SHA-256 hashes:
documents.json 2a62ab05687982c112a29f6126227c26c3ff8defc89ca64662753aaf85c3c0ce
v1.2-coding-package.json 14644759f53071adfe1173d4e25bb01931b8c1591fa8a48295dbd0556a754769
oss-governance-coding-protocol-v1.2.md
06d4b3407677fe7fb23046f70164a366db06638e8a29af3daf7661f00d565933
governance-coding-v1.schema.json bfc735a7d8602d1f236a88c2d23b195f0600a8bae86fb8c8936afe7883a41b8e
governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json
6181f5cb60a0462f83be00be301763daa89f11581e68ee1c46a84e8bf4e5be31
Validation command:
uv run python -c 'import json; from pathlib import Path; from institution_lab.governance_adjudication import validate_adjudication_fragment; root=Path("."); load=lambda p: json.loads((root/p).read_text()); fragment=json.loads(Path("/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json").read_text()); errors=validate_adjudication_fragment(fragment, load("cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/documents.json"), load("cases/review/oss-governance-adjudication-v1/v1.2-coding-package.json"), load("schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json")); print(json.dumps(errors, ensure_ascii=False, indent=2)); raise SystemExit(bool(errors))'
Exact result, exit status 0:
[]
No repository files were edited.
{
"schema_version": 1,
"design_status": "performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication",
"reviewers": [
{
"reviewer_id": "opencode-gpt-5.6-sol-valkey-b",
"reviewer_type": "llm",
"model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
"role": "source_adjudicator",
"assistance": "Independent source-first adjudication of Valkey records 36-40"
}
],
"records": [
{
"record_id": "valkey-github-issue-4509",
"source_url": "https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/4509",
"decision": "reject",
"accepted_from": null,
"reviewer_ids": [
...
* 🟡 (02:34) Adjudication workflow reported all 5 assigned tasks completed in order: (1) inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for five records; (2) compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses; (3) derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions; (4) validate the five-record fragment against frozen inputs and schema; (5) return one substantive r…
Date: September 9, 2026 * 🔴 (02:30) User-provided file reaffirms: “Licenses are now also always explicitly first, even above documentation in files.” (`record_id`: `valkey-github-issue-4509`, line 320)
* 🔴 (02:28) User-provided frozen source states: “Licenses are now also always explicitly first, even above documentation in files.” * 🟡 (02:28) Final source audit superseded the prior PR 345 decision to accept Luna B exactly: Luna B’s five-edge response omitted the patch’s express grant of broad TSC oversight over technical, project, approval, and policy matters, violating the complete-edge req…
* 🟡 (02:26) Five-step high-priority adjudication workflow status changed: 1. “Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order” — completed; 2. “Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records” — completed; 3. “Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions” — completed; 4. “Validate…
* 🟡 (02:20) Five-step adjudication workflow status: 1. “Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order” — completed; 2. “Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records” — completed; 3. “Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions” — completed; 4. “Validate the five-record adjud…
Date: Sep 9, 2026 * 🟡 (02:19) Debugging found that the attempted PR 2927 correction inserted the missing modified TSC `remove` edge into `final_coding.power_changes` rather than `graph_edge_revision.added`, creating a duplicate `remove` edge in `/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json`. * 🟡 (02:19) Fixed `/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json` by removing the duplicate final-coding edge and making `graph_edg…
Date: Sep 9, 2026 * 🟡 (02:15) Created `/tmp/opencode/valkey-36-40.json`. * 🟡 (02:15) Inspected `validate_adjudication_fragment()` in `/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py` lines 659–754. The fragment schema requires `schema_version=1`, `design_status="performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication"`, at least 1 reviewer, and at least 1…
* 🟡 (02:15) Frozen source titled “[NEW] Create n8n-nodes-valkey repository for n8n Valkey Vector Store community node” proposes creating `valkey-io/n8n-nodes-valkey` to host the `n8n-nodes-valkey` NPM package. * 🟡 (02:15) Source characterizes n8n as an open-source workflow-automation platform with 202k GitHub stars and 60k forks, built-in AI/LangChain integration for RAG pipelines, semantic cac…
* 🟡 (01:59) `valkey-github-pr-2927` Terra advisory response was schema-invalid despite coding `effective_institutional_change` / `board_or_steering`; validation error: `power_changes[1].evidence_refs[0] is not grounded`. * 🟡 (01:59) Terra’s `valkey-github-pr-2927` ordered edge revisions were: 1. modified TSC `set_membership` authority under the `1/3` organization-affiliation composition limit a…
* 🟡 (01:56) Five-record adjudication workflow status: 1. “Inspect protocol, schemas, and complete frozen source envelopes for the five assigned records in order” — completed, high priority; 2. “Inspect and compare only direct Luna A, Luna B, and Terra responses for the assigned records” — completed, high priority; 3. “Derive source-grounded final codings and graph-edge revisions” — completed, hi…
* 🟡 (01:46) User supplied additional `/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_adjudication.py` lines `743-817`. Fragment validation skips non-object rows after adding `"adjudication record must be an object"`, skips non-string or unknown record IDs, requires at least one listed reviewer whose role is `source_adjudicator`, and then calls `_validate_record(record…
Date: Sep 9, 2026 * 🟡 (01:44) User supplied a frozen Valkey pull-request envelope titled/body-described as an “Initial PR outlining the governance for the project,” adding a governance document for the main Valkey project and responsibilities for sub-projects. * 🟡 (01:44) The supplied PR metadata records `changed_files: 3`, `draft: false`, `merged: true`, `merged_at: 2024-04-30T21:57:21Z`, `sta…
* 🟡 (01:34) `/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json` defines adjudication schema version `1` with `$id` `https://institutional-transition-lab.local/schema/governance-adjudication-v1.schema.json`, `additionalProperties: false`, `design_status: performance_blinded_llm_assisted_source_adjudication`, `transition_dates_excluded: true`, and `outcome_d…
* 🟡 (01:33) `/home/byk/Code/institutional-transition-lab/src/institution_lab/governance_coding.py:241-315` showed that `validate_response` requires the response’s keys to equal `RESPONSE_KEYS`; validates `record_class` against `RECORD_CLASSES`, non-null `event_kind` against `EVENT_KINDS`, non-null `title`/`affected_scope`/`ambiguity` as non-empty strings, `announced_on`/`effective_on` as ISO dat…
Date: Sep 9, 2026 * 🔴 [requested-retry] (01:19) User stated the prior review returned an empty result and directed exactly one retry against the unchanged five-record scope. * 🔴 [enforced-workflow] (01:19) User required a read-only, source-first, performance-blinded adjudication; repository files must not be edited. * 🔴 (01:19) User directed: “Never return empty.” The response must be either (…
Date: Sep 8, 2026 * 🟡 (21:42) Direct coding-package responses for `valkey-github-issue-4509` were inspected. `luna_a` classified it as `proposal_only` / `control_rights`, `body_only`, announced `2026-08-24`, no effective date, confidence `0.98`; proposed power change: `valkey-io` gains `steward` rights over repository hosting and long-term maintenance for the proposed `valkey-io/n8n-nodes-valkey…
Date: Sep 8, 2026 * 🔴 [requested-governance-adjudication] (21:39) User requested a READ-ONLY, source-first, performance-blinded governance adjudication of exactly 5 Valkey records in this order: 1. `valkey-github-issue-4509`, 2. `valkey-github-pr-1390`, 3. `valkey-github-pr-1788`, 4. `valkey-github-pr-2927`, 5. `valkey-github-pr-345`. * 🔴 (21:39) User specified repository `/home/byk/Code/instit…