# ShopDB Flask - Project Health Review
As of HEAD `ecf4ef6` (2026-07-30), product `__version__ 0.7.0`, contract `__contract_version__ 0.15.0` (verified in `shopdb/__init__.py`).

## 1. Executive Summary

**Overall: healthy engineering, drifting focus.** The stated product vision ("plugin system is the product," the project brief) is delivered: all 7 refactor phases are done, 13 bundled plugins are contract-compliant, the per-plugin migration regime (ADR-008) is live and exercised (geenforce is at `geenforce0002blobs`, proving the post-cutover chain works in anger), and CI enforces naming, contract, and real-MySQL migration idempotency. Test count grew 1077 -> 1159 since the last the project brief snapshot.

The concern is not quality but trajectory. the project brief and ROADMAP.md both name the last big milestone before 1.0 as "legacy-ASP data import + production pilot." The loader is built and VM-validated (16 stages, `scripts/site_imports/wjf/`), but the prod run has not happened, and ~35 of the last 60 commits went to the GE-Enforce HTTPS cutover instead. That work is legitimate and high-value, but it is feature/fleet work on one plugin, and it has accumulated two process debts that violate the project's own discipline: the cutover playbook (`docs/geenforce-api-cutover.md`) is the only dirty file in the repo and is **untracked**, and the `prod-patch-geenforce` robocopy fast-path can leave prod ahead of git.

**Verdict: on track against standards, behind against goals.** The 1.0 gate has four items; only one is arguably done, and the roadmap doc does not know it.

## 2. Standards Compliance

| Rule | Status | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Naming (tables/columns/vars, CONTRIBUTING.md) | **MET** | `scripts/check-naming-and-style.sh` present and executable; dedicated `naming` job in the internal CI workflow. One borderline: `asset.py:175` documents a derived API key `location_name` with an underscore - not a DB-mirrored column so likely legal, but worth a glance since "response keys match column names exactly" is the spirit of the rule. |
| Plugin contract (manifest.json, BasePlugin, `shopdb.api` only) | **MET** | 13 `plugins/*/manifest.json` verified; contract test suites in `tests/`; contract bumped correctly to 0.15.0 for the geenforce resource-scope fetch tokens (75386d2), per ADR-002 discipline. |
| Migration ownership (ADR-008) | **MET** | `PLUGIN_TABLE_OWNERS` registry tested by `tests/test_plugin_migrations.py` (`EXPECTED_HEAD_REVISION` lines 47-51); `migrations-mysql` CI job does fresh utf8mb4 MySQL 8 upgrade + all plugin chains + second-upgrade-no-op assertion. The geenforce `0002blobs` revision shows the per-plugin chain is being used as designed, not just anchored. |
| Versioning/release discipline (ADR-007) | **AT RISK** | Tags through v0.7.0 exist and contract bumps are disciplined, but the documentation half of the procedure has drifted - see Gaps 3. |
| ADRs canonical, new priorities get an ADR | **AT RISK** | 14 ADRs present. But lean per-site builds are half-shipped (ADR-014 ACCEPTED and implemented; `default_enabled: false` on 5 plugins) while ADR-013, which defines the catalog/tiers/signed-artifact model those builds imply, is still PROPOSED. The GE-Enforce HTTPS cutover itself - a major architectural shift off the SMB share - lives in an untracked doc, not an ADR or ADR-012 amendment. |
| Style (plain ASCII, no emojis, comment discipline) | **MET** | Enforced by the same pre-commit hook + CI naming job. |
| Everything in git / repo as source of truth | **VIOLATED** | `docs/geenforce-api-cutover.md` untracked (only dirty file, verified `git status`); `prod-patch-geenforce` robocopy path acknowledged in-doc as leaving prod ahead of git. |

## 3. Roadmap Status

**Done:** Phases 0-6 (contract lock through multi-site distribution, tags v0.5.0-v0.7.0). Legacy import machinery complete: `docs/IMPORT-API.md` contract, 16-stage wjf loader VM-validated. Air-gapped deploy kit (6534590).

**1.0 must-haves (ROADMAP.md), honestly scored:**

1. *Asset model fully wired* - **appears DONE but unrecorded.** `Asset.mapx` (`shopdb/core/models/asset.py:121`), `inheritsposition` (`relationship.py:132`), and propagation logic (`relationship.py`, `core/api/assets.py`, `cli/__init__.py`) are all in code. ROADMAP still lists this as outstanding. Verify the ADR-001 contract tests cover it, then strike it.
2. *Equipment data migration one-shot* - **NOT DONE.** `scripts/migration/` contains only `fix_legacy_schema.sql`, `one-offs/`, and a README. No equipment script.
3. *Printers legacy-table cleanup* - **NOT DONE.** Recent printers commits (0d40780..c075658) are installer/feature work, not retirement.
4. *External plugin UI packaging* - **NOT DONE**, and gate criterion 3 (one external plugin built end-to-end) has no evidence.

**In-flight:** GE-Enforce HTTPS cutover dominates (~35/60 recent commits). Per the cutover doc's own section 12: only displays/kiosks are on the API; cmm/collections/keyence/genspect/heattreat/partmarker/common fleet still enforce from the SFLD SMB share; loggedinuser resolution unwired; registry cleanup pending; 3DPrintRoom route is a placeholder. Secondary streams: printers install-batch, applications notes, server reclassification, TV dashboard.

**Pace/scope health:** Velocity is high and test coverage tracks the work (17 of ~29 plugin test files are geenforce). But the project has been at 0.7.0 with "prod pilot is the last big milestone" as the stated goal since mid-July, while shipping ~185 commits of plugin-feature work. That is a real product being used - good - but the 1.0 gate is not moving, and a half-migrated fleet (API for displays, SMB for everything else) is the worst place to pause the cutover.

## 4. Gaps and Risks

1. **Untracked cutover playbook** (`docs/geenforce-api-cutover.md`). The single most valuable in-flight document is one `rm` away from gone, and invisible to any other machine or contributor.
2. **Prod-ahead-of-git debt.** The `prod-patch-geenforce` fast-path means production behavior may not be reproducible from any commit. This directly undermines ADR-012's "engine is source of truth" and the release discipline of ADR-007.
3. **Documentation drift, three concrete instances (all verified):** ROADMAP.md header says contract 0.13.0 (actual 0.15.0); the project brief says 1077 tests (actual 1159 collected) and claims a "lean-build" CI job that does not exist in the internal CI workflow (jobs: backend, naming, frontend, migrations-mysql - lean coverage is folded into pytest via `tests/test_lean_build_guards.py`). Also `.github/workflows/ci.yml` differs from the internal CI workflow - one of them is stale.
4. **Split-brain fleet enforcement.** Displays/kiosks on the API, the rest of the fleet on the SMB share, with staged-but-unpushed manifest fixes elsewhere (MTConnect v1 stranding). Two delivery mechanisms means two failure modes and doubles the audit surface until the cutover finishes.
5. **1.0 gate criterion 4 unproven:** `docs/DEPLOY.md` has not been validated by an actual fresh-host prod deploy. The air-gapped kit exists; the pilot does not.
6. **ADR-013 limbo:** lean builds shipped under ADR-014 while the catalog/signing model that makes external distribution safe remains PROPOSED. Fine short-term, but gate criterion 3 (external plugin) will force the question.

## 5. Prioritized Recommendations

1. **Commit `docs/geenforce-api-cutover.md` today.** Zero-cost, eliminates the worst single-point-of-loss risk.
2. **Reconcile prod-patched geenforce files back into git** and gate or retire the robocopy fast-path. Until prod == some tag, ADR-007 is fiction for this plugin.
3. **One doc-sync pass (30 min):** ROADMAP header to 0.15.0, the project brief test count and CI job list, strike must-have (a) if contract tests confirm the Asset wiring, delete or sync the stale `.github` workflow.
4. **Finish the cutover or park it cleanly.** Either drive the remaining fleet groups onto the API per section 12, or write down the frozen state as an ADR-012 amendment so the split-brain period is a documented decision, not drift.
5. **Schedule the prodscratch import run and prod pilot.** This is the actual 1.0 milestone and everything is built for it; it validates DEPLOY.md (gate 4) for free.
6. **Pair the equipment one-shot migration with printers retirement** (must-haves b and c) - they are coordinated by design; doing them together avoids touching the legacy tables twice.
7. **Decide ADR-013** before building the external-plugin end-to-end proof (gate 3); the geenforce client work is the natural seed for that external plugin.
