dot-iu-cutter v0.5 — Constitution Snapshot-source MARK Patch Apply & CI Report

Phase: v0_5_constitution_snapshot_source_MARK_entrypoint_patch_apply_and_CI · Nature: controlled_apply__BLOCKED_at_precondition · Date: 2026-05-18 · doc 4 of 4

apply_status: BLOCKED ; commit_status: NONE ; downstream_not_executed: true
decision_authority: GPT / User ONLY ; self_advance: PROHIBITED

---

1. Required report fields

apply_status:           BLOCKED   (STOP_AND_REPORT — patch application rule #1)
repo_path:              /Users/nmhuyen/iu-cutter-build/repo/iu-cutter
                        (authoritative per KB SSOT code-authoring report §2)
branch:                 N/A — not a git repository
HEAD:                   N/A — not a git repository
git_status_before:      "fatal: not a git repository" (no .git in dir or any parent)
git_status_after:       IDENTICAL — patch not applied; working tree byte-unchanged
files_added:            0
files_modified:         0
files_deleted:          0
tests_run:              NONE (downstream of clean apply; not reached)
test_result:            NOT_RUN (BLOCKED upstream at rule #1)
git_diff_summary:       UNAVAILABLE (no git repo); effective filesystem diff = EMPTY
commit_status:          NONE (no commit; not a git repo; not authorized regardless)
deploy_status:          NOT DEPLOYED
downstream_not_executed: true — NO first Constitution dry-run, NO CUT, NO VERIFY,
                        NO production IU, NO production DB write, NO source_document/
                        source_version mutation, NO schema change, NO Directus
                        mutation, NO deploy/restart, NO git commit, NO self-advance
next_recommended_phase: GPT/User ruling on the iu-cutter repo git status (§4)

2. What happened (chronological, factual)

1 read KB SSOT: code-authoring package (incl. patch doc 2 identity), GPT ruling
  + OD-G3 approval, code-authoring report (repo path + expected shas)
2 located candidate repos: /Users/nmhuyen/iu-cutter-build/repo/iu-cutter (authoritative),
  /Users/nmhuyen/.iu-cutter-stage/iu-cutter (older stage)
3 verified git state LIVE this phase:
    git rev-parse / status / remote  => "fatal: not a git repository"
    parent walk to /                 => NO .git at any level
    find under iu-cutter trees + /Users/nmhuyen (cutter) => NO .git anywhere
    git binary present (2.39.5) but NO repository exists
4 rule #1 ("if repo is not a git repo: STOP_AND_REPORT") => TRUE => STOPPED
5 rule #2 check (recorded): target files do NOT pre-exist (clean) — but rule #1
  is the controlling BLOCKING gate; no apply attempted
6 NOTHING written/applied/committed/run; repo working tree byte-unchanged
7 produced this 4-doc BLOCKED report → route GPT/User

3. Why STOP_AND_REPORT (not git init, not plain-file drop)

- rule #1 is explicit and unconditional: not a git repo => STOP_AND_REPORT
- the phase contract (apply + CI + report branch/HEAD/git status before&after/
  git diff) is intrinsically git-bound; none of it is definable without a repo
- `git init` would create/alter repo structure: a sovereign decision NOT in the
  allowed-actions list and not ratified — "never invent missing authority"
- a non-git plain-file drop would (a) defy rule #1, (b) discard the diff/rollback/
  CI guarantees this phase exists to provide, and (c) be the very working-tree
  mutation the code-authoring phase deliberately avoided — doing it now = self-
  advance (PROHIBITED)
- governance culture here: BLOCKED is preferred over a guessed PASS; stop on
  state/assumption mismatch; route sovereign decisions to GPT/User
- the conflict is pre-existing and KB-flagged: code-authoring report §2 already
  recorded "NOT a git repository"; this phase's apply+CI premise assumed a git
  repo that does not exist — a genuine state mismatch, correctly surfaced

4. Next recommended phase (GPT/User decision — not self-selected)

blocking_question: there is no git-tracked authoritative iu-cutter repository in
  this environment; the patch + CI cannot proceed git-bound as specified.
options_for_GPT_User (sovereign):
  OPT-A (recommended): designate/establish the authoritative GIT-TRACKED
    iu-cutter repo, then re-run THIS phase. Concretely one of:
      A1 GPT/User authorizes `git init` of /Users/nmhuyen/iu-cutter-build/repo/
         iu-cutter + an initial commit of the existing ratified v0.4 skeleton
         (baseline), THEN apply the additive patch on a branch + CI + diff
      A2 GPT/User points to the real GitHub-backed iu-cutter clone (if it exists
         elsewhere / on another host) as the apply target
  OPT-B (less preferred): GPT/User explicitly authorizes a NON-git plain-file
    application with sha256 verification (== f1f42e83… / 31143968…) as an
    accepted deviation, accepting loss of git diff/branch/rollback/CI guarantees
do_not: proceed without an explicit ruling; the first Constitution dry-run stays
  separately gated regardless of OPT-A/B outcome

5. Quality-gate self-check

QG1 patch only to authorized files unless STOP_AND_REPORT : PASS — 0 files
      touched; STOP_AND_REPORT invoked correctly at rule #1
QG2 no dry-run / CUT / VERIFY / production DB              : PASS — nothing executed
QG3 tests local only                                       : PASS (vacuous) — no
      tests run; none touched a DB
QG4 git diff/status reported                               : PASS — reported as
      definitively "not a git repository"; before==after; empty effective diff
QG5 no commit / no deploy                                  : PASS
QG6 stop after uploading 4 files                           : PASS — exactly 4 docs

6. Authoritative patch (unchanged, unapplied)

KB doc 2 remains the SSOT patch artifact, NOT applied this phase:
  cutter_agent/dryrun.py             sha256 f1f42e83ca23ba0b328f79cf04a8391ac699d1b307eb1b22b52c305f2efa1422
  tests/test_dryrun_snapshot_mark.py sha256 31143968f322433cc5da62fa3ccf2a1fbe1905f461940c789a57cb0a116dc1b4
prior validation (code-authoring phase, scratch): 21/21 PASS (cited, not re-run)

7. Explicit non-execution statement

• apply_status = BLOCKED. No patch applied. No file written to the repo. No tests run. No first Constitution dry-run. No CUT. No VERIFY. No production IU. No production DB write. No source_document/source_version mutation. No schema change. No Directus mutation. No deploy/restart. No git commit. No git init. Repo working tree byte-unchanged. No live DB SELECT. No self-advance.
• Exactly 4 docs under knowledge/dev/laws/dieu44-trien-khai/v0.5-constitution-snapshot-source-mark-entrypoint-patch-apply-ci/.
• doc 4 of 4 — STOP. Route to GPT / User review for the repo git-status ruling (§4). Self-advance PROHIBITED.

Companion docs: patch-apply-log (1), patch-test-result (2), git-diff-status (3).