1e3c995e6f
* fix(#2789): scope the emitted-drift ack to the diff that introduced it Every input to `diffEmitted` is base-relative -- `baseline` vs `current`, `changedPaths` from `git diff base...HEAD` -- except the ack set, which was read absolutely, from the working tree only. A differential machine consulting a non-differential input. So `staleAcks` asks exactly one question, "did a delta consume you?", and that cannot distinguish an ack that never explained anything (an authoring mistake) from one whose ripple is now absorbed into the base (the ack's SUCCESS condition). After merge an ack is in the second state but reports as the first. The trigger is ordinary. Actions sets GITHUB_BASE_REF on pull_request events only, so a push to `next` falls through to origin/next -- the very commit under test. Both sides build identical content, no deltas remain, and every live ack is reported stale. PR #2768 acked a deliberate 40866 -> 42020 byte growth, was green on its own lane, and reddened `next` the moment it merged. It also reds every PR branching off the poisoned base, and since publish-emitted-baseline is gated on the test job, it blocked baseline publication too. Give the ack the base side it was missing. `diffEmitted` now takes `baseAck` -- the same document at the base ref, via `readAckFileAtRef`. An entry already present there is SPENT: it may no longer consume a delta and is never reported stale, only surfaced as `spentAcks` for tidying. An entry new or reworded in this diff stays live, and if nothing consumes it that genuinely fails, with blame on the author who just wrote it. This closes a hazard the IMPLEMENTATION named but could not prevent -- a leftover ack silently pre-clearing the next ripple on its path. (ADR-2719 §3 asserted only that TOUCHING the file is the alarm; its residual-risk list never covered pre-clearing, and §3 now carries an amendment.) Verified against the two-PR laundering sequence -- land an innocuous ack, then change the artifact -- which passed silently before and now fails on both the hash pass and the size ratchet. Three things the design has to get right, each of which was wrong first: - A read failure on the base document THROWS; only absence-at-the-ref returns null. Returning null on error LOOKS armed (every entry stays live) but a live entry's defining power is that it CONSUMES a delta, so null is armed on the staleness axis and DISARMED on consumption -- silently the whole pre-#2789 gate. `git show` cannot tell absence from fault, so absence is established with `ls-tree`. - Re-arming a spent ack costs actual PROSE. Internal whitespace and the zero-width family collapse, and `runtime` is not compared: a doubled space, an invisible character, or a decorative field would otherwise re-arm an ack whose justification still describes the previous ripple, showing a reviewer nothing. - `baseAck` is REQUIRED once an ack declares entries -- omission is an error, not a silent "inherit nothing" -- so a dropped argument fails loudly instead of quietly restoring this bug with the suite green. Because a corrupt document ON THE BASE is expensive (the loud base-side failure reds every ack-carrying PR), scripts/lint-emitted-drift-ack.cjs blocks one from landing. It is standalone rather than importing parseAck -- scripts/ ships in the npm package and tests/ does not -- so a parity test runs both surfaces over one corpus and fails on divergence; it caught one immediately, a `null` document, now classed as policy rather than schema. Deadlock is separately foreclosed: a tree carrying no ack never reads the base, so the PR that DELETES a corrupt file still lands. `readAckFileAtRef` takes an injected git runner so all four branches are tested deterministically; it never executes in the remote runner, where the real-tree test skips for want of a base ref. It also refuses an option-shaped ref, since execFileSync's array form stops shell metacharacters but not git's own option parsing. Rejected: skipping the differential when base == HEAD. It treats the symptom, costs real coverage on the push-to-next lane, and does nothing about the downstream PRs the same flaw was reddening. Deletes the now-spent tests/emitted-drift-ack.json, and updates the CONTEXT.md canon and ADR-2719 §3: presence is no longer the alarm -- a LIVE entry is, and a spent one is inert. Closes #2789 * chore(#2789): backfill changeset PR number
GSD Core
Git. Ship. Done.
English · Português · 简体中文 · 日本語 · 한국어
A light-weight meta-prompting, context engineering, and spec-driven development system for Claude Code, OpenCode, Antigravity CLI, Kimi CLI, Kilo, Codex, Copilot, Cursor, Windsurf, and more.
What is GSD Core
GSD Core is a context-engineering and spec-driven development framework that drives AI coding agents (Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity CLI, Kimi CLI, Copilot, Cursor, and more) through a disciplined phase loop. It solves context rot — the quality degradation that accumulates as an AI fills its context window — by running all heavy research, planning, and execution work in fresh-context subagents while keeping your main session lean.
How it works
Each milestone repeats the same five-step loop, one phase at a time:
- Discuss — capture implementation decisions before anything is planned
- Plan — research, decompose, and verify the plan fits a fresh context window
- Execute — run plans in parallel waves; each executor starts with a clean 200k-token context
- Verify — walk through what was built; diagnose and fix before declaring done
- Ship — create the PR, archive the phase, repeat for the next one
Quickstart
npx @opengsd/gsd-core@latest
The installer prompts for your runtime (Claude Code, OpenCode, Antigravity CLI, Kimi CLI, Kilo, Codex, Copilot, Cursor, Windsurf, and more) and whether to install globally or locally. The installer is required for cross-runtime compatibility — do not copy files from agents/ or commands/ directly.
On another runtime or without Node.js? See Install on your runtime.
Once installed, start a new project or onboard an existing repo:
/gsd-new-project # greenfield project
/gsd-onboard # existing codebase
New here? Follow Your first project for a guided walkthrough from install to first shipped phase, or Onboarding an existing codebase for brownfield setup.
Documentation
What's new in 1.7.0 → docs/whats-new-1.7.0.md
Tutorials — learning by doing:
How-to guides — task-focused recipes:
Reference — authoritative facts:
Explanation — concepts and design decisions:
Full index: docs/README.md. Other languages: 日本語 · 한국어 · Português · 简体中文.
Why it works
Most AI-coding setups fail at scale because context bloat silently degrades output quality, there is no shared memory between sessions, and nothing verifies that code actually works. GSD Core solves all three: heavy work runs in fresh subagents, structured artifacts like STATE.md and CONTEXT.md survive session boundaries, and the verify step walks through what was built and generates fix plans before a phase is declared done. See docs/explanation/context-engineering.md for the full reasoning.
Troubleshooting? See docs/how-to/recover-and-troubleshoot.md.
Community
| Project | Platform |
|---|---|
| gsd-opencode | Original OpenCode port |
| Discord | Community support |
Star History
License
MIT License. See LICENSE for details.
Claude Code is powerful. GSD Core makes it reliable.