From e5dcb30e887ed49732eb461da0f9a88396eb94ac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Jonathan D.A. Jewell" <6759885+hyperpolymath@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 08:09:04 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] docs: stop describing two deleted CI workflows as live MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit npm-bun-blocker.yml was REPLACED by runtime-policy.yml, and ts-blocker.yml was DELETED outright, across 55 repositories on 2026-07-29. These documents still described both as active CI. npm-bun-blocker -> runtime-policy (renamed in place; it has a successor) ts-blocker -> removed (no successor; the rule it enforced, "use ReScript instead", is itself retired) Why they went, briefly: the old npm-bun-blocker failed any build carrying bun.lockb with "Use Deno instead", which blocked what is now the FIRST-choice runtime under standards/LANGUAGE-POLICY.adoc §1 and mandated the second. ts-blocker could not fail at all -- it diffed HEAD~1 on a depth-1 checkout, sent the error to /dev/null and swallowed it with || true. 20 of 20 runs green; it never once fired. Deliberately NOT touched, and excluded from the sweep that produced this: * dated records -- CRG-AUDIT-2026-04-18.adoc, SESSION-CLOSE-*, STATE-ASSESSMENT-*, CHANGELOGs, .audittraining/. They record the tree AS IT WAS; rewriting them would falsify the record. * standards/LANGUAGE-POLICY.adoc, which names both workflows on purpose in order to document their retirement. Full scan: dev-notes/SCAN-RESULTS-2026-07-29.adoc. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 --- docs/arghda-vision.adoc | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/arghda-vision.adoc b/docs/arghda-vision.adoc index 6c81414..6056a5e 100644 --- a/docs/arghda-vision.adoc +++ b/docs/arghda-vision.adoc @@ -622,8 +622,8 @@ reset the 6a2 files from the template's own evolution to ArghDA. * *`.well-known/`* — `ai.txt`, `humans.txt`, `security.txt` (RFC 9116). * *Docs* — `.adoc` only (no `.md` under `docs/`); the SSG is `casket-ssg` (Jekyll banned). -* *CI hard gates* — `openssf-compliance`, `ts-blocker`, - `npm-bun-blocker`, `estate-rules`, `secret-scanner`, +* *CI hard gates* — `openssf-compliance`, + `runtime-policy`, `estate-rules`, `secret-scanner`, `security-policy`, `workflow-linter`, `wellknown-enforcement`, `scorecard-enforcer` (every workflow: SPDX header, `permissions:` block, SHA-pinned actions). The TS/npm blockers are *not* a problem —