Release 0.5.0: PR-less per-RFC discussion (contribution still requires PR)

Roadmap item #3. An RFC's main view now carries a discussion surface
distinct from PR comments and from branch chat. The substrate is the
existing threads/thread_messages tables — rows with branch_name IS NULL
scope to the RFC's main view; the schema already permitted that shape,
v0.5.0 is the first build to write it. Five new endpoints under
/api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/..., a new RFCDiscussionPanel right-column
component used when branchParam === main, SPEC §10.10 settling
discussion-vs-contribution, and §17 listing the new routes. Notification
routing reuses the existing chat_message_in_participated_thread /
chat_reply_to_my_message event kinds with branch_name=null on the
fan-out row; a distinct event_kind is a §19.2 candidate. Anonymous
viewers can read; writes require contributor — v0.6.0's item #4 will
harden adjacent gates. No schema migration; minor bump, no operator
action required beyond rebuild and restart.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Ben Stull
2026-05-27 23:00:25 -07:00
parent 0f8b318afa
commit c92730a737
14 changed files with 1244 additions and 19 deletions
+97
View File
@@ -23,6 +23,103 @@ skip versions are the composition of each intervening adjacent
release's steps in order — no A-to-B path is pre-computed beyond
that.
## 0.5.0 — 2026-05-27
**Minor — no operator action required.** This release wires the
PR-less per-RFC discussion surface (roadmap item #3, SPEC §10.10).
An RFC's main view now carries a discussion panel distinct from PR
comments and branch chat; contribution — proposing edits the document
will land — still requires opening a PR via the §10.1 affordance.
The substrate is the existing `threads` / `thread_messages` tables;
rows with `threads.branch_name IS NULL` scope to the RFC's main view.
No schema migration is required.
### Added
- **PR-less discussion endpoints** (`backend/app/api_discussion.py`)
mounted at `/api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/...`:
- `GET /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads` — list threads where
`threads.branch_name IS NULL`. Anonymous-readable per the v0.3.0
contract; the default whole-doc chat thread is materialized
lazily on first read.
- `POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads` — open a new
discussion thread (`thread_kind='chat'`, `anchor_kind='whole-doc'`,
`branch_name=NULL`). Body: optional `label`, optional first
`message`. Requires contributor role.
- `GET /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads/<thread_id>/messages`
— read messages on a discussion thread. Anonymous-readable.
- `POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads/<thread_id>/messages`
— post a message. Body: `text`, optional `quote`. Requires
contributor role.
- `POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads/<thread_id>/resolve`
— resolve a discussion thread. Permission per §10.10: thread
creator, RFC owner / arbiter, or app admin / owner.
- **`RFCDiscussionPanel.jsx`** — the right-column surface on the RFC
view when the viewer is on `main`. Composer requires sign-in;
Cmd/Ctrl+Enter sends. Multiple threads surface as pill-shaped
tabs above the message feed. A "New thread" affordance opens a
fresh thread on the same RFC.
- **SPEC `§10.10` PR-less discussion vs. contribution** — settles
the distinction between discussion (RFC-scoped, no PR, both
anonymous-readable and contributor-writeable) and contribution
(still requires a PR via §10.1). Also extends `§5`'s `threads`
table commentary so the null-branch interpretation is documented
as actively used rather than reserved scaffold.
- **SPEC `§17`** — lists the five new `discussion/...` endpoints
in the illustrative table.
### Changed
- **`backend/app/chat.py`** — `_fan_out_chat` now passes
`branch_name` straight through to the notify chokepoint instead of
coercing `None` to `"main"`. The notifications row carries the
null through, which preserves the §15.7 reconciler's keying on
`(rfc_slug, branch_name)` for the eventual discussion-side
chat-seen advance (deferred to a §19.2 candidate). Existing
branch-scoped chat continues to pass non-null branch names; the
change is invisible to that path.
- **`backend/app/notify.py`** — `fan_out_chat_message`'s
`branch_name` parameter is now typed `str | None` to match the
v0.5.0 PR-less shape. Routing rules are unchanged; the inbox prose
renders identically whether the chat lives on a branch or on the
RFC's discussion surface, which is the right honest signal.
- **`RFCView.jsx`** — the right-column panel is now conditional:
when `branchParam === 'main'`, render `RFCDiscussionPanel`
(the new PR-less surface); otherwise render the existing
`ChatPanel` (branch chat unchanged).
### §19.2 candidates surfaced
- PR-less discussion: range / paragraph anchors (the data model
permits them; the UI is the deferred part).
- PR-less discussion: distinct notification `event_kind`s
(`open_rfc_discussion_thread`, etc.) if usage shows contributors
want to filter discussion-vs-branch in the §15.2 inbox.
- PR-less discussion: chat-seen cursor closing the §15.7
reconciliation loop for the new surface.
- PR-less discussion: AI participant invocation (discussion-only,
no `<change>` block side-effects).
- PR-less discussion: anonymous-read polish to match the v0.6.0
write-gate hardening (item #4).
### Upgrade steps (from 0.4.0)
1. The deployment **MUST** rebuild the frontend (`npm install &&
npm run build`) so `RFCDiscussionPanel.jsx` ships in the bundle.
No new env vars; existing `frontend/.env` is sufficient.
2. The deployment **MUST** restart the backend so the new
`api_discussion` router mounts. No schema migration runs — the
`threads` table already supports `branch_name IS NULL` per §5,
and the v0.5.0 build is the first to write rows in that shape.
3. The deployment **MAY** announce the new surface to its
contributors: the RFC view's main page now carries a discussion
panel below the document. Existing branch chat and PR review
surfaces are unchanged.
4. The deployment **SHOULD NOT** expect a hardening of the
anonymous-write gate in v0.5.0 — that lands in v0.6.0 (item #4).
v0.5.0's write paths already refuse anonymous posts, so no
pre-emptive operator action is needed.
## 0.4.0 — 2026-05-27
**Minor — no operator action required beyond rebuild + restart.** The