docs(#3198): record project-gitignore-for-third-party-agent-runtime as out-of-scope (#3219)

Records the 2026-08-08 triage denial of #3198 in the .out-of-scope/ knowledge
base so the prior-denial check on a future triage sweep can find it, rather
than the reasoning living only in a closed-issue comment.

The request asked to add .omc/ and .omo/ to "the init-template .gitignore".
gsd-core ships no such template: the __pycache__/*.pyc pair quoted in the
report is gsd-core's own repo .gitignore, and at init the only project
.gitignore write is a single .planning/ line under commit_docs = No. The
.omc and .omo directories have zero occurrences anywhere in the repo.

The entry's "What this does NOT cover" section keeps adjacent asks live --
notably any report that gsd-core itself writes churning runtime state outside
.planning/, which would be a real defect and is not denied here.

Closes #3198

Co-authored-by: sim <sim@local>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.out-of-scope/project-gitignore-for-third-party-agent-runtime.md

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+# Scaffolding a project `.gitignore` for third-party agent runtime state
+
+**Source:** [#3198](https://github.com/open-gsd/gsd-core/issues/3198)
+**Decision:** wontfix — closed as filed; the premise the request rests on does not hold
+**Date:** 2026-08-08
+
+## Proposal summary
+
+Reporter observed 436 of 556 dirty `git status` entries in a real project coming from agent
+runtime state — `.omc/state/checkpoints/*`, `.omo/run-continuation/*`, and replay/loop logs —
+being versioned in the project repo. Attributing this to GSD, the request was to add `.omc/`,
+`.omo/` and "any other agent-runtime dirs the toolchain writes" to what the report calls "the
+`.gitignore` shipped by the init template", which the report characterises as excluding only
+`__pycache__/` and `*.pyc`. A `git rm -r --cached` migration note for existing projects was
+proposed alongside.
+
+The underlying complaint is real and well-evidenced: continuously-rewritten runtime state buried
+296 genuine changed files under 436 runtime entries.
+
+## Why GSD does not own this
+
+- **There is no init-template `.gitignore`.** This repo contains exactly one `.gitignore` — its
+  own. The `__pycache__/` + `*.pyc` pair the report quotes is `.gitignore:261-262` of the
+  gsd-core working tree, immediately followed by `.venv/`, `venv/` and `target/`; it is neither
+  "only two entries" nor installed anywhere. No copy manifest, installer path, or workflow ships
+  it into a user project.
+- **The only project-`.gitignore` write GSD performs is a single `.planning/` line**, and only
+  when the operator answers `commit_docs = No` at init (`gsd-core/workflows/new-project.md:638`,
+  and again for the multi-repo path at `:676`). There is no template to extend.
+- **`.omc` and `.omo` are not GSD artifacts.** Zero occurrences across `src/`, `bin/`,
+  `gsd-core/`, `commands/`, `agents/`, `capabilities/`, `docs/`, and every shipped `.md`, `.json`
+  and `.yml`. GSD neither creates, reads, nor has any knowledge of those directories. Ignoring
+  another tool's runtime state is that tool's responsibility; a GSD-authored ignore list naming
+  third-party paths would silently rot as those tools rename their directories, and GSD would
+  have no signal that it had.
+- **The one GSD-owned path named in the report is already governed.** `.planning/forensics/` is
+  ours (`gsd-core/workflows/forensics.md:171`), but it lives under `.planning/`, whose
+  tracked-vs-local status is an explicit init decision. A project that answered `commit_docs = No`
+  already ignores it; a project that answered `Yes` is versioning `.planning/` on purpose.
+
+The report was right that the churn is a genuine problem worth solving. It is not right about
+which component is producing it.
+
+## What this does NOT cover
+
+This entry denies exactly one thing: **GSD enumerating third-party agent-runtime directories in a
+`.gitignore` it writes.** The keyword surface here (`gitignore`, "runtime state", "dirty tree") is
+broad, and the following remain welcome and are **not** denied by this decision:
+
+- A report that **GSD itself** writes churning runtime state outside `.planning/`. That would be a
+  live defect, and this entry is not a precedent against fixing it.
+- Making the existing `.planning/` ignore write more robust — idempotency, ordering, handling a
+  missing or malformed `.gitignore`.
+- Ignore-list handling for directories a **GSD capability** creates.
+- Documentation telling users which paths their own toolchain should ignore alongside a GSD
+  project, as prose rather than as a generated file.
+
+## Re-open criteria
+
+Concrete and checkable:
+
+- GSD begins shipping or generating a project `.gitignore` with substantive content (beyond the
+  single `.planning/` line), at which point what belongs in it becomes a real design question.
+- A reproduction demonstrates a directory **created by gsd-core or one of its capabilities**
+  producing continuous working-tree churn and not already covered by the `commit_docs` decision.
+
+A request to ignore paths owned by a different tool is not re-openable on volume of churn alone;
+the churn is evidence about the writing tool, not about GSD.
+
+## Related
+
+- `gsd-core/workflows/new-project.md` — the `commit_docs` decision and the `.planning/` ignore write
+- `gsd-core/workflows/forensics.md` — writes `.planning/forensics/`, under the `.planning/` umbrella