Skip to content

Conversation

@lessuselesss
Copy link

This PR adds work stream tracking to WORK_STREAM_TASKS.md for the feature/work-stream-integrity branch.

Summary

Documents a proposed implementation of cryptographically verifiable work stream management using structured data formats and automated validation, moving beyond markdown-only documentation to enforceable, platform-agnostic tooling.

Key Features to Explore

1. Structured Data Format

Replace markdown-only tracking with machine-readable TOML/JSON/YAML:

  • Enable programmatic queries and validation
  • Support automated compliance checking
  • Generate human-readable markdown from structured source

2. Cryptographic Verification

Leverage cryptographic proof over platform trust:

  • Sign work stream data with git commits
  • Verify PR dependency chains cryptographically
  • Prove status PR preceded code PR using commit hashes
  • Platform-independent verification (works with any Git hosting)

3. Test Contract PR Model (Optional/Exploratory)

Evaluate intermediate PR defining function signatures before implementation:

  • Status PR → Test Contract PR (interfaces) → Implementation PR
  • Benefits: Clear API contracts, better planning, testable specifications
  • Concerns: Additional overhead, complexity for simple changes
  • Needs evaluation and community discussion

4. Platform-Agnostic Validation

Shell scripts for workflow enforcement without vendor lock-in:

  • Works with GitHub, GitLab, Gitea, self-hosted Git, etc.
  • Git hooks for local validation
  • No dependency on GitHub Actions or similar CI/CD

Work Stream Stages Planned

Stage 1: Requirements & Design

  • Choose data format based on tooling and readability
  • Design schema for branches, stages, tasks, PRs, dependencies
  • Document cryptographic verification model
  • Create comprehensive requirements document

Stage 2: PR Dependency Verification

  • Define cryptographic references between PRs
  • Specify git commit hash linking for dependencies
  • Document verification process for PR ordering
  • Explore test contract PR feasibility

Stage 3: Test Contract PR Model

  • Research interface-first development benefits
  • Design function signature contract format
  • Determine integration with status/code PR workflow
  • Document pros/cons and make recommendation

Stage 4-7: Implementation

  • Data conversion tools (parser, generator, validator)
  • Platform-agnostic validation scripts
  • Git hook integration
  • Documentation and migration guide

Open Questions Documented

  1. Data Format: TOML vs JSON vs YAML - criteria for selection
  2. Test Contract PR: Value vs overhead trade-off
  3. Cryptographic Verification: Scope and integration approach

Related Work

This is a status update PR per the Work Stream Management Strategy. Implementation work will follow in a separate code PR after community discussion and design decisions.

All tasks are tagged with [feature/work-stream-integrity].

lessuselesss and others added 2 commits October 21, 2025 04:04
Documents planned implementation of cryptographically verifiable work stream
management with structured data formats and automated integrity validation.

Renamed from feature/verified-work-streams to feature/work-stream-integrity
to better reflect focus on cryptographic integrity and data verification,
aligning with OpenIntegrityProject's mission.

Key features to explore:
- Structured data format (TOML/JSON/YAML) for machine-readable work streams
- Cryptographic verification of PR dependencies and ordering
- Optional test contract PR model (function signatures before implementation)
- Platform-agnostic validation scripts and git hooks

Stages defined:
1. Requirements & Design - Define structured format and verification model
2. PR Dependency Verification - Cryptographic reference model
3. Test Contract PR Model - Evaluate interface-first approach
4. Data Conversion Tools - Parser and generator scripts
5. Validation Scripts - Platform-agnostic workflow compliance checking
6. Git Hook Integration - Pre-commit and pre-push validation
7. Documentation & Migration - Comprehensive docs and migration guide

Open questions documented for data format selection, test contract workflow,
and cryptographic verification scope.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ashley Barr <[email protected]>
…t research

- Add 3 new key features: TDD integration, format interoperability, configurable workflows
- Document related systems: Kiro Specs, spec-kit, Tessl, ADRs, Sigstore, Living Docs, Nickel
- Propose Nickel for runtime contract validation with export to JSON/YAML/TOML
- Add Stage 5 (TDD Integration), Stage 8 (Configurable Workflows), expand to 9 stages
- Add 2 new open questions: TDD integration approach, configurable workflow schemas
- Include RED-GREEN-REFACTOR phase tracking inspired by Kiro Specs
- Document format conversion tools: yj, jty-converter, prodevtool
- Add cryptographic TDD verification via commit hash tracking

Expands the work-stream-integrity proposal based on research into:
- Kiro Specs' TDD tracking and spec-driven development workflow
- Nickel language's runtime contract validation capabilities
- Universal format conversion for interoperability
- Prior art in spec-driven development and architecture decision records

This creates a more comprehensive vision for cryptographically verifiable,
configurable work stream management with built-in TDD support.

Signed-off-by: Ashley Barr <[email protected]>
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