Skip to content

governance: define the GLYPH Centenary 247 standard - #7

Draft
yasha1971-coder wants to merge 13 commits into
mainfrom
centenary-247-v1
Draft

governance: define the GLYPH Centenary 247 standard#7
yasha1971-coder wants to merge 13 commits into
mainfrom
centenary-247-v1

Conversation

@yasha1971-coder

@yasha1971-coder yasha1971-coder commented Aug 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

What changed

Adds four new files only:

  • docs/governance/GLYPH_PRESERVATION_LAW_V1.md
  • docs/governance/GLYPH_MOVEMENT_LEDGER.md
  • docs/governance/GLYPH_CENTENARY_247_V1.md
  • tools/check_centenary_247_v1.py

No existing file, tag, release, or branch content is deleted or modified.

Why

This establishes an additive, domain-neutral quality framework for GLYPH with exactly 247 atomic engineering facets. The catalog draws measurable practices from exact-search, storage-engine, formal-verification, reproducible-build, secure-supply-chain, fuzzing, API, and operational exemplars.

It also records the Owner directive effective 2026-08-14:

  • only the Owner may authorize deletion or destructive replacement of durable project records;
  • important moves require a dated ledger entry;
  • better variants are additive and may supersede older variants without erasing them.

Evidence discipline

The document deliberately does not certify GLYPH merely by existing. It states:

247 DEFINED; 0 CLAIMED CLOSED BY THIS DOCUMENT.

Stars, forks, discussions, adoption, tests, formal proof, and independent replay are separate evidence classes. Final closure requires commit-bound evidence and independent replay.

Validation

facet_count = 247
facet_ids = F001..F247
section_count = 13
preservation_law = PRESENT
movement_ledger = PRESENT
GLYPH CENTENARY 247 STRUCTURE OK

Remote file contents were fetched from centenary-247-v1 and matched the locally validated source byte-for-byte.

Review focus

  • Is every facet atomic and non-duplicative?
  • Are any closure artifacts weaker than the stated claim?
  • Does the preservation law match the Owner directive without blocking ephemeral build cleanup?
  • Which existing immutable GLYPH artifacts can be mapped to facets without retroactive overclaiming?

Automated and independent review state

These zeroes are recorded intentionally: the proposal creates a reviewable standard but does not manufacture external validation.

Automated and independent review state

These zeroes are recorded intentionally: the proposal creates a reviewable standard but does not manufacture external validation.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Additive identity/dependency refinement — 2026-08-14

The review target has advanced additively from the creation head 0122c2a... to:

87e2157e1b1f2361279c99016b3412a0ead7fd81

No earlier revision was rewritten or removed. PR boundary is now 11 commits, 6 changed files, 1,239 additions, and 0 deletions.

The preserved entity is now explicitly identified at two levels:

  1. stable logical object ID, preserved across a pure move;
  2. immutable revision ID sha256:<digest>, bound to repository, commit, Git blob, path, byte length, version, date, and authority.

Relationships are first-class identified edges: DEPENDS_ON, IMPLEMENTS, VERIFIES, EVIDENCES, PRODUCES, REFINES, SUPERSEDES, MOVED_FROM, COMPATIBLE_WITH, and INVALIDATES.

Before movement, supersession, destructive replacement, or proposed deletion, the transitive incoming dependency closure must be computed. Missing registry coverage is UNKNOWN, never “no dependencies”; unresolved dependents fail closed.

New review files:

  • docs/governance/GLYPH_OBJECT_IDENTITY_AND_DEPENDENCY_V1.md
  • docs/governance/GLYPH_OBJECT_GRAPH_V1.json

Current graph identity:

logical object:
glyph-object:governance:object-graph:v1

publication commit:
87e2157e1b1f2361279c99016b3412a0ead7fd81

content SHA-256:
294665bc5390ec380458d805a12f7e286fc734d78ca82cee7708371af04043b0

Git blob:
fa7a2077ec4ae5470999000c064741ce3e292581

Structural validation:

facet_count = 247
facet_ids = F001..F247
section_count = 13
registered_object_count = 6
registered_relation_count = 8
dependency_unknown_policy = FAIL_CLOSED
GLYPH CENTENARY 247 STRUCTURE OK

Independent review should use the new head. The creation head remains preserved as historical review context.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Validation update for review head 87e2157e1b1f2361279c99016b3412a0ead7fd81:

The repository CI success is recorded separately from independent technical approval; independent approval count remains zero until a reviewer supplies the scoped record requested above.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Preservation-register audit update — 2026-08-14

Current proposal boundary:

  • head: e2f37209301ef09bfd097c90352bf71f436ad338
  • commits ahead of main: 13
  • changed files: 7
  • diff: +1563 / -0
  • base main remains unchanged at 9f79fd5cf8f969ed46c2c1ad7945f6b5a2944edb

Additive changes:

  1. 7445592dac07a25bab06c45ea3db87e3ffd3e7bb adds docs/governance/GLYPH_PRESERVATION_REGISTER_V1.md.
  2. e2f37209301ef09bfd097c90352bf71f436ad338 binds that register into the existing GLYPH_OBJECT_GRAPH_V1.json; no new graph version or parallel core was created.

The register records the 2026-08-14 preservation boundary for 12 branches, 12 tags, 2 releases, 643 tracked blobs, durable repository families, the proof/evidence promotion queue, source/citation retention, corpus and benchmark provenance, and fail-closed deletion handling. Recording an item preserves discoverability; it does not certify correctness, production readiness, or integration into main.

Validation:

facet_count = 247
facet_ids = F001..F247
section_count = 13
preservation_law = PRESENT
movement_ledger = PRESENT
registered_object_count = 7
registered_relation_count = 10
dependency_unknown_policy = FAIL_CLOSED
GLYPH CENTENARY 247 STRUCTURE OK

GitHub CI succeeded for both the push and pull-request events at the current head. The Centenary checker was also executed separately against byte-exact files fetched from the remote branch. Independent scoped approvals remain 0; this update does not claim external validation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant