P1, and the worst of them: the AUTHORITY BLOCK was stale in four ways
while this lane's whole purpose was retiring stale ledger state. The
canonical base said `122b8e8` (actual: `e67ad07`), protocol said
`v6..=v22` (actual: v23, #228), the recovery threshold accepted
`9a26ac8` --- far older than the base above it, so the check it defines
would pass on a tree missing everything since --- and this lane's own
entry named base `0e4c58d` and declared itself PARKED beneath a heading
saying ready-for-PR. A ledger that contradicts itself defeats its own
cross-machine purpose. All four corrected; the park bullet is replaced
by what actually happened.
"Exactly two journey deficits" was stronger than the evidence permits,
and the table said so three paragraphs below itself: GPU 3(c) and 9 are
INFERRED, so a third failure cannot be ruled out. Now "known failures at
two steps; exact set pending verification". GPU 6(c) is inferred too and
is noted as unable to change step 6, which 6(e) already floors.
The product subgrade had criteria but no GRADING RULE --- three closure
conditions distinguish closed from not-closed, which does not derive
`Weak` rather than `Partial` or `Missing`. A rule is now stated, and the
distinction it turns on is worth having: `Partial` would mean the GPU is
merely unfinished; `Weak` means it is BEHIND a frontend shipping in the
same binary. Criterion 3 is marked NOT ASSESSED --- §3.2's register is
seeded empty --- rather than being quietly counted as a pass.
The framing REQUIRED a handoff §6 cross-reference and there was none;
only the Lean 4 numbering note existed. Added, carrying the facts a
cross-machine reader needs first: the product subgrade, the P2 start
gate, and that "Arc 8" means Lean 4.
Three more scorecard-versus-ground-truth drifts, the same class this
lane exists to close: row 14 said listview has 4 call sites "all LSP
panels" (it has 5 in `lsp.lua` and 4 in `git.lua` since #227, so it is
no longer LSP-only); row 15 said "no git integration at all" while §15
records status and diff; and §9's plane table said no builtin opens
`*lsp*`, though `M-x lsp.status` does (`lsp.lua:3533`) --- it has no
BINDING, which is the distinction this document now draws everywhere
else.
Finally, §20 physically placed the arc after Priority 5 while its prose
said after Priority 1. In a *Recommended Priority Order* position is the
schedule, so the block moves to sit directly after P1, and now states
its interleaving with P2-P5 explicitly rather than leaving it to
position alone.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016bqGA6s9tTUFzYpbeW3tai
Levi Neuwirth
30e22090ae