agentic-praxis-grimoire

Legacy Roadmap Closure

Purpose

This ledger closes every former unnumbered candidate or explicitly deferred v0.1 theme. Closure means that APG has accepted either a completed artifact, a future active v0.2 owner, a conditional research boundary, or a terminal rejection/project owner. Historical assignment to a later phase did not itself mean the work was implemented; the ledger now records completed APG12 through APG14 artifacts.

Stable legacy IDs preserve a one-to-one source identity even where older roadmaps grouped several questions in one row. Composite themes retain explicit sub-dispositions rather than being forced into a misleading single implementation state.

Disposition vocabulary

Every row below is closed as a legacy-roadmap question. Future-active rows remain incomplete as implementation.

Terminal ledger

ID Original theme Final APG11 disposition Owner or artifact Evidence Rationale and reconsideration condition Closed
LT01 Publication-surface validation implemented-by-APG12 ADR 0009, release process, and apg-public-release APG12 evaluation Exact non-private projection, critical-owner policy, and executable regression now detect the public v0.1.0 omitted-wrapper class. Yes
LT02 Skill authoring and bounded maintenance checks implemented-by-APG11 Authoring and maintenance guide, ADR 0008, and apg-check-skill-library APG11 evaluation Repeated APG4-APG10 practice supports one maintainer procedure and narrow mechanical checker, not another skill or generalized framework. Yes
LT03 Generalized prompt scoring conditional No active implementation owner ADR 0006; bootstrap model Reconsider only when a supported isolated evaluation can freeze treatment, claims, scenarios, scoring, reviewer contract, variance handling, and rollback before results. Yes
LT04 Systematic debugging and fresh verification implemented debugging-systematically and reviewing-and-verifying-repository-work Provenance; APG9 evaluation The reusable procedures exist and have real-use evidence. APG13 reviews maturity rather than reimplementing them. Yes
LT05 Planning and design implemented planning-repository-work and designing-significant-changes Provenance; APG9 evaluation Existing leaves own dependent execution planning and consequential design. APG13 reviews maturity. Yes
LT06 Implementation and proportional test discipline implemented for the reusable procedure; universal runner, coverage, and duplicated language policy are rejected-or-project-owned implementing-with-test-discipline plus repository policy Bootstrap model; APG10 evaluation The leaf owns proportional behavioral evidence. Exact runners, thresholds, and language policy remain repository-owned. Yes
LT07 Review and generic delivery implemented for evidence-first review; generic delivery is rejected-or-project-owned reviewing-and-verifying-repository-work; native harness and project policy for delivery Superpowers transition; bootstrap model Review is implemented. Branch, pull-request, worktree, push, release, cleanup, and handoff mechanics do not justify one universal APG delivery workflow. Yes
LT08 Language and project-standard profiles conditional No active implementation owner ADR 0006 Reconsider only after multiple validated skills demonstrate that repository instructions are repeatedly insufficient. Yes
LT09 Repository-local Codex discovery implemented Checked-in .agents/skills projection from APG4A APG4A exit Six relative links expose one canonical library without content duplication. Yes
LT10 Opted-in project-local projection lifecycle implemented ADR 0004, apg-project-skills, and the projection guide APG7 evaluation; APG7A exit Install, adopt, check, uninstall, ownership, refusal, and rollback have executable evidence. Yes
LT11 Public-sourced user-global integration implemented-by-APG12 User-scoped integration guide and apg-user-skills ADR 0009; APG12 evaluation Verified public-source install, adopt, check, update, rollback, uninstall, restart, recovery, and duplicate-warning semantics are implemented; active migration remains separately authorized. Yes
LT12 Additional harness adapters or packages conditional No active implementation owner Project model; ADR 0006 Reconsider only when a named harness demonstrates a separate need, compatibility contract, rollback boundary, and authority. Yes
LT13 Licensing and contribution governance implemented ADR 0005 and aligned governance files Roadmap The accepted public license, commercial option, CLA terms, notices, and contribution acknowledgment answer the APG-owned question. Yes
LT14 Public repository creation implemented Public v0.1.0 repository projection APG9 evaluation; APG9 exit Public v0.1.0 exists. Its wrapper omission is LT01, not a reason to reopen repository creation. Yes
LT15 Public v0.2 projection implemented-by-APG14 APG14 evaluation and release process ADR 0006 APG14 builds and independently verifies the deterministic candidate, publishes one appended squashed release commit and annotated tag, and preserves the fresh-session application smoke as an external gate. Yes
LT16 Release cadence rejected-or-project-owned Human maintainer ADR 0006 Cadence and version timing are publication choices, not a reusable APG procedure. Yes
LT17 Hosted services conditional No active implementation owner ADR 0006 Reconsider only with a concrete service, safety model, operator, and explicit authority. Yes
LT18 Autonomous worker infrastructure rejected-or-project-owned Native harness behavior and the manager-worker protocol Superpowers transition; ADR 0006 APG does not need a scheduler, runtime, epic controller, or additional execution-controller skill. Yes
LT19 Telemetry conditional No active implementation owner ADR 0006 Reconsider only with a concrete decision deficit, privacy-safe contract, retention rules, and explicit authority. Yes
LT20 Wholesale source migration rejected-or-project-owned Selective APG evaluation and provenance policy Provenance; ADR 0006 APG evaluates and selectively synthesizes practices; it does not migrate a source methodology wholesale. Yes
LT21 Broader dogfooding and individual maturity implemented-by-APG13 ADR 0010 and APG13 evaluation Historical matrix, frozen applications, regressions, and final reviews APG13 inventories each skill’s evidence distribution and records six stable dispositions without treating distribution or non-triggers as positive use. Yes
LT22 Clean baseline-versus-treatment comparison conditional No active implementation owner and not a stable prerequisite ADR 0006; bootstrap model Reconsider only with supported baseline isolation, controlled candidate availability, observable invocation where claimed, sealed evidence, and a frozen evaluation contract. Yes
LT23 Superpowers decommission, rollback, preservation, and bounded smoke implemented with recorded limitations Human decommission action, transition/runbook records, and APG9 smoke Superpowers transition; APG9 evaluation Decommission, source preservation, rollback instructions, and bounded smoke are complete. Exhaustive inventory, universal workflow coverage, comparative superiority, and successful restoration remain unverified limitations rather than open implementation. Yes
LT24 Post-Superpowers skill review implemented-by-APG13 ADR 0010 and APG13 evaluation Six post-Superpowers suitability reviews Each current leaf has post-retirement positive or direct-review evidence and no retired-tool dependency. Yes

Coverage and owner audit

The ledger contains 24 stable IDs and 24 rows. Each assignment theme appears once. LT21 and LT24 remain distinct questions completed by one phase: evidence breadth and maturity disposition versus explicit suitability after the Superpowers transition. LT06 and LT07 retain their implemented and project-owned sub-dispositions rather than implying universal test or delivery machinery.

Category totals are nine implemented, one implemented-by-APG11, two implemented-by-APG12, two implemented-by-APG13, one implemented-by-APG14, six conditional, and three rejected-or-project-owned. No future-active row remains and no duplicate implementation artifact is introduced.

APG12A subsequently corrects the lineage and read-only enforcement of the existing LT01 and LT11 artifacts. It does not add or reopen a ledger row, change any disposition count, begin a future owner, or claim that the original APG12 implementation already contained the correction.