30 — Bundle Self-Review & Acceptance

Path: knowledge/dev/reports/architecture/one-roof-governance-technical-addendum-and-implementation-index-2026-06-01/ Doc: 30. Self-review of the council-packet + scanner/event design bundle (docs 23–29). Status: PASS (design/decision-packet only). Zero PG/Directus/Qdrant/Nuxt mutation. No approval, no enactment, no registration, no emit.

---

1. Acceptance criteria (mission §10)

#	Criterion	Status	Evidence
1	State recovery complete	✅	§2 — all 11 mandated sources read (00/03/04/16/17/18/20/21 + GPT review + concept canon 00–03 + constitution); live re-verified §3
2	C-1/C-2 decision packet complete	✅	doc 23 — both decisions: question, recommended option, rejected alternatives, exact wording, unlock/no-unlock, deps, rollback, no-self-approval, NO-GO
3	T7 issue/event design complete	✅	doc 24 — 20 issue types × {issue_type, severity, owner, coalesce_key, cooldown, emit-ceiling, event_type, notification target, auto-close, suppression, audit relation}; Đ45; anti-spam
4	T6 scanner/DOT design complete	✅	doc 25 — lifecycle, 6-layer detector, 7 DOTs × 13 attributes, SB-7 audit, SB-8 rows, reconciliation, apply NO-GO
5	OP-B IU owner packet complete	✅	doc 26 — island evidence, 3 candidate models, recommended default, no-local-island, four Mothers, unlock map, SB-3 still-blocked, exact wording
6	Auto-approve hardening risk note complete	✅	doc 27 — verbatim live evidence + trigger timing, 4 risk scenarios, action≠'add' reason, conventions, 5 hardening options, tests
7	Integration/readiness map complete	✅	doc 28 — unlocks, NO-GO, dependency graph, gate table, macro order, continuation contract
8	All docs under implementation-index package	✅	docs 23–30 all under …/one-roof-governance-technical-addendum-and-implementation-index-2026-06-01/
9	No implementation occurred	✅	KB docs only; no committed DDL/DML/DOT/event/route
10	No unsafe mutation occurred	✅	all PG access read-only (context_pack_readonly, READ ONLY txn, AST-validated SELECT); §4
11	No hardcoded current axes/object lists	✅	doc 24 §10, doc 25 §3, doc 28 §8 — inventory from registries/config/source-inventory, fails closed on missing source
12	No local governance island introduced	✅	doc 28 §8 — single spine reused throughout; OP-B dissolves the existing IU island

Result: PASS — all 12 met.

---

2. State-recovery verdict

• Latest controlling package: …/one-roof-governance-technical-addendum-and-implementation-index-2026-06-01/ (docs 00–22 prior; this bundle appends 23–30). It controls until a newer explicit index supersedes it.
• What SB-1/SB-2 completed: both are design-complete (docs 16, 17, 20). SB-1 = 4 governance action-types as apr_action_types rows, two-phase fail-closed (Phase A handler_ref='unimplemented'), quorum data-driven by risk_level, auto-approve bypass identified + mitigated, exception-store correction. SB-2 = additive governance_object_ownership + 6-row governance_responsibility_scope + resolution view, owner-per-scope uniqueness, container-grain inheritance Δtotal=0, axis decoupled from SB-3, no migration risk to the 8 live edges. Integration is coherent + non-island.
• What remains open: C-1, C-2 (council, this bundle's packet); OP-B/C-3, C-4 (council); C-5, C-6; H-1, H-2; SB-1, SB-2 (designs done, not built); SB-3 (independent); L-1, L-2, L-3; SB-4..SB-9. None closed here.
• Allowed work (this macro): council/decision packets + dependent technical designs + risk note + readiness map, all design-only.
• Forbidden work: implementation, mutation, approval/self-approval, enactment, registration, emit, version-bump (see §3).
• Why design/decision-only: the constitution's Survey-Then-Design / Design-Only mode (§4H, §4I) + doc 03 §3.5 gates: apply/remediation/IU-binding/render/enactment are all NO-GO behind SB-1/2/3 + the 8-item council/human surface; the GPT review explicitly directed a bundled design/adjudication macro, not implementation.

---

3. Forbidden compliance (mission §11)

Forbidden	Complied?
Persistent PG mutation	✅ none — all SELECT, read-only role
Directus mutation	✅ none
Qdrant/vector write	✅ none
Nuxt/UI/API/route implementation	✅ none
COMMIT	✅ none
Schema/table/view/function creation	✅ none — designs only
DOT registration or implementation	✅ none — 7 DOTs designed, registered=0
Event registration	✅ none — event taxonomy designed, registered=0
Event/job/notification emit	✅ none
Approval creation	✅ none — packets only
Self-approval	✅ none — explicit no-self-approval statements (doc 23 §4, doc 26 §9)
Law enactment	✅ none
Version bump	✅ none
Status change	✅ none
Implementation disguised as design	✅ none — apply/register/emit explicitly NO-GO in every doc
Hardcode	✅ none — registry/config-sourced; attestations doc 24 §10, 25 §3, 28 §8
Hidden local governance island	✅ none — single-spine reuse; OP-B dissolves the IU island
Competing package	✅ none — appended to the existing package

---

4. Mutation footprint

• KB: created 8 documents (23–30) via upload_document, all under the implementation-index package. (This index entry pointer is the only MEMORY update.)
• PG: read-only, role context_pack_readonly, DB directus. Probes: apr_action_types rows; fn_auto_approve_add/fn_apr_quorum_check/fn_apr_block_unimplemented_handler source; approval_requests trigger defs; governance_relations constraints; to_regclass (new tables absent); governance_registry rows; approval-spine counts; IU island counts (information_unit, dot_iu_command_catalog, iu_three_axis_envelope). Zero committed mutation.
• Directus / Qdrant / Nuxt: untouched.

---

5. Where it wrote

23-c1-c2-council-decision-packet-sb1-sb2.md, 24-t7-issue-event-notification-technical-design.md, 25-t6-governance-coverage-scanner-dot-technical-design.md, 26-op-b-iu-owner-decision-packet.md, 27-auto-approve-hardening-risk-note.md, 28-bundle-integration-and-readiness.md, 29-next-prompts.md, 30-self-review.md — all under knowledge/dev/reports/architecture/one-roof-governance-technical-addendum-and-implementation-index-2026-06-01/.

---

6. No-hardcode / no-local-island attestation

• No-hardcode: action-types are rows; quorum from risk_level; severity computed from (gap_family × object_risk_class × shared_truth); routing from v_object_effective_owner + governance_responsibility_scope; scanner inventory from meta_catalog/registry_collections/Axis Registry/profile registry, failing closed on a missing source. No axis/object/agency/severity literal embedded in any design's logic.
• No-local-island: one governance_registry, one Điều 32 spine, one ownership store, one event substrate (Điều 45), one issue store, one audit (registry_changelog). The OP-B recommendation explicitly folds the existing IU island (54-command catalog, 0 governed owners) into the central roof rather than sanctioning a parallel one.

---

7. Weaknesses & honest limitations

1. Decisions are packets, not rulings. C-1/C-2 (doc 23) and OP-B/C-3+C-4 (doc 26) are framed for a council; nothing is ruled. The critical path still waits on a recorded human/council decision — by design.
2. Rehearsal not executed live. query_pg is read-only and AST-rejects DDL/DML, so all BEGIN..ROLLBACK tests (docs 25/27 and the P1/P5 prompts) are author-mode/operator-handoff plans, not live runs (consistent with doc 19). The operator path is ssh contabo → docker exec postgres psql -U workflow_admin.
3. Issue-type bucket trade-off. Doc 24 rides the existing system_issues coarse taxonomy (thiếu_quan_hệ/sai_lệch_dữ_liệu) + detail jsonb + registered event_type, rather than minting 20 new free-text issue_type strings. This favors reuse/anti-spam continuity over per-row issue_type precision; the precise gap lives in the event_type and detail. A reviewer could prefer dedicated issue_types — flagged for the P7 critique.
4. Pre-SB-2 degradation. The scanner's owner-finding tier (L3) and routing depend on SB-2 views; pre-build they degrade to non-owner gaps + default-hint/COUNCIL routing. Documented (doc 25 §6.2/§11), not hidden.
5. Live-count drift. system_issues is ≈190,288 (live, growing) vs ≈188k earlier; template_gap cited as 183,378 (doc 17) vs 182,378 (memory). These are anti-spam scale references, not load-bearing counts; re-verify before relying. No decision depends on the exact figure.
6. Severity/routing policies are proposals. The computed-severity rule and routing map (doc 24 §5/§7) are design defaults subject to council adjustment; they are not enacted policy.

None of these is an unsafe state or a silently-closed blocker.

---

8. Gate check (mission §6)

This macro performed no live action requiring the §6 gate — it is design/decision/read-only only. The §6 gate is documented as standing for every downstream build step (doc 28 §5). No EXECUTION_MODE/PASS was claimed for any gated/authority-blocked action.

---

9. Next allowed macro

P1 — C-1/C-2 ruling intake + SB-1/SB-2 build-prep (critical path, conditional on a recorded ruling) ∥ P4 — OP-B ruling + SB-3 design (conditional) ∥ P7 — bundle critique/red-team (always safe). Then P2 (T7 register packet), P3 (T6 scanner build-prep), P5 (auto-approve rehearsal), P6 (L-1/L-2 law cleanup). Full list + gates: doc 29.

---

10. Verdict

PASS — council-packet + scanner/event design bundle complete (design/decision-only, zero mutation). All seven branches delivered (A: C-1/C-2 packet; B: T7 events; C: T6 scanner; D: OP-B; E: auto-approve hardening; F: readiness; + next-prompts + this self-review). Every commit/register/emit/owner-write/enactment remains NO-GO behind recorded gates. No implementation, no unsafe mutation, no hardcode, no local governance island, no self-approval, no competing package.