docs: the contract manifest stands alone; public docs describe this engine only
Some checks failed
CI / Node 22 (push) Successful in 12m18s
CI / Node 24 (push) Successful in 12m17s
CI / Integration + conformance (Node 22) (push) Failing after 17m7s
CI / Bun (latest) (push) Successful in 12m19s
Some checks failed
CI / Node 22 (push) Successful in 12m18s
CI / Node 24 (push) Successful in 12m17s
CI / Integration + conformance (Node 22) (push) Failing after 17m7s
CI / Bun (latest) (push) Successful in 12m19s
The manifest's prose pointer named a document that answers a confidential specification, and such a document does not belong in a public repository even in summary. The pointer is dropped — the manifest is generated from this engine's own surface and is self-describing — and the requirement marking it deliberately omits is recorded with the contract's owner rather than here. The standard is written down so this is not relitigated per document.
This commit is contained in:
parent
61a469270e
commit
a8c724a202
3 changed files with 6 additions and 4 deletions
|
|
@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"contractVersion": 1,
|
||||
"engine": "@soulcraftlabs/brainy",
|
||||
"prose": "docs/contract-1-ratification.md",
|
||||
"compatibility": {
|
||||
"minor": "additive — a new optional door, a new served operator, a new error class; every existing implementation still conforms",
|
||||
"major": "breaking — a door removed, an answer narrowed, an ordering law changed, an optional door promoted to required, or an operator moved from served to refused"
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Reference in a new issue