a9a7a328e6
Mechanical rename produced by scripts/msd-rename.cjs: gsd/Gsd/GSD -> msd/Msd/MSD across contents and paths, upstream package/repo coordinates -> @golem15/msd-core and golem15com/msd-core. Deep links into upstream history, sibling upstream packages, the GSD-2 import feature, CHANGELOG.md and .changeset/ are kept as-is. Hand edits on top: MSD block-letter banner and logos, LICENSE copyright line, package/plugin identity, regenerated lockfile, install-tree fixtures, derived registries and benchmark baseline; migration checksum baseline re-locked (MSD keeps its own install state, so no install had applied the old sums); sort-order and regex-escaped expectations in tests adjusted.
62 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
62 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
# PRD: README Continuity And Release Communications Update
|
|
|
|
## Linked Issue
|
|
|
|
- Closes #209
|
|
|
|
## Problem
|
|
|
|
The top-level README still mixes legacy transition language, personal attribution, and outdated migration framing. Users need one clear source of truth for:
|
|
|
|
- canonical repository and package identities
|
|
- current maintainer ownership/governance
|
|
- migration guidance away from legacy upstream artifacts
|
|
- security and audit status references
|
|
|
|
## Goals
|
|
|
|
1. Remove legacy personal maintainer attribution from README narrative sections.
|
|
2. Present open-gsd continuity messaging in concise, team-owned language.
|
|
3. Provide explicit migration guidance from legacy packages to `@opengsd/*`.
|
|
4. Reference public announcement and security-audit discussions directly.
|
|
5. Keep changes docs-only and non-behavioral.
|
|
|
|
## Non-Goals
|
|
|
|
- Any runtime, CLI, or workflow behavior changes.
|
|
- Any package publishing process changes.
|
|
- Any new security policy implementation beyond documentation updates.
|
|
|
|
## Scope
|
|
|
|
- `README.md` top continuity notice
|
|
- `README.md` "Why" narrative section rewrite
|
|
- release/continuity cross-links and wording cleanup
|
|
|
|
## User Stories
|
|
|
|
- As a new user, I can quickly identify which repo/package is canonical.
|
|
- As an existing user, I can safely migrate away from legacy package names.
|
|
- As a security-conscious user, I can find the public audit status and continuity rationale in one place.
|
|
|
|
## Acceptance Criteria
|
|
|
|
1. README contains a continuity notice naming `golem15com/msd-core` as canonical.
|
|
2. README removes personal legacy attribution in origin-story prose.
|
|
3. README strongly recommends migration away from legacy artifacts.
|
|
4. README links to Discussions #109 and #119.
|
|
5. README states current audit posture with "no known active exploit" language.
|
|
|
|
## Risks
|
|
|
|
- Overstating security claims beyond published evidence.
|
|
- Mitigation: keep wording scoped to publicly posted announcement text.
|
|
- Migration warning language may be interpreted as policy rather than recommendation.
|
|
- Mitigation: phrase as a strong recommendation based on ownership and governance reality.
|
|
|
|
## Rollout
|
|
|
|
1. Update README content.
|
|
2. Open docs PR linked to #209.
|
|
3. Run CI and merge once green.
|