Six procedures that could not be followed as written.
Eighty-nine curl examples single-quoted `Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN`, so the
shell never expanded it and the server answered 422 "Not enough segments". Nine
more did the same with X-API-Key. The other 129 examples in the same file
already used double quotes, so this was drift rather than a convention, and the
spec regenerated from it carried the fault onward.
The GE-Enforce report example put a `//` comment inside a JSON body. The server
parses with silent=True, so it saw `{}` and answered "hostname is required"
about a body that plainly has one - the worst kind of error message, one that
sends the reader to the wrong field entirely.
The IIS install ran `flask db upgrade` and a per-plugin install loop but never
`flask plugin upgrade-all`, leaving every plugin's own chain unapplied. That is
precisely the 1054 "Unknown column" a deploy then hits somewhere else, days
later, on the page that uses the new column.
The pilot runbook looped `flask plugin enable` over plugins that were not yet
installed; enable refuses those, so on a fresh database it exited 1 on every
iteration and enabled nothing. ADR-013 had already recorded that defect.
`apply-profile` installs and enables in dependency order, which is what the step
was reaching for.
DEPLOY-WINDOWS-IIS named a profile file that does not exist; the shipped ones do.
And PLUGIN-EXTERNAL-REPO never mentioned PLUGIN_TABLE_OWNERS, while the
migration engine raises for any plugin missing from it - so the guide's own
step 5 fails for any external plugin that owns a table. That the registry lives
in the framework repo is deliberate, so the guide now says so, and says what it
costs: a table-owning external plugin is a two-repository change, and a plugin
that owns no tables avoids it entirely.
The publishability gate caught internal tooling names and developer paths but
nothing site-specific, so roughly sixty leaks reached the wiki: the site name in
ten documents, real fleet hostnames in the collector and GE-Enforce examples, an
internal database name through the whole import guide, imaging-share paths, and
a maintainer's username as the Deciders line of every ADR and inside a generated
curl example.
None of it is a security matter on an air-gapped fleet. It matters because these
pages are read by engineers at other plants, and a document that names one site
throughout reads as that site's notes rather than a product's documentation -
which is exactly what it then gets treated as.
Examples now use neutral hostnames, the site is "the reference site" where the
distinction carries meaning, and ADRs are decided by "ShopDB maintainers". The
gate carries all of these patterns, so the next one fails a build.
Two documents leave docs/ because they were never written for an outside reader.
PROJECT-REVIEW.md is an internal health memo pinned to a commit from July, whose
headline finding (an untracked playbook) has since been fixed - it is history,
and git holds it. PILOT-DEPLOY.md is one site's own cutover runbook, complete
with a "re-measure before publishing" placeholder; it moves next to the loader
it belongs to, in scripts/site_imports/wjf/.
ADR-015 is AMENDED rather than rewritten. Its enforcement section still said
report-only and its backlog still listed hardcodes that are now cleared, which
left the record contradicting itself. The amendment says what changed and why
the report-only period ended; the original text stays, because what the decision
looked like when it was taken is the part worth keeping.
Also corrects llms.txt's response envelope, which had errors at the top level
and pagination at meta.total. Both are nested one deeper, so anything written
against that description read undefined on every error it tried to handle.
