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>

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -23,6 +23,148 @@ 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
+proposer of a new RFC is now the implicit first owner of its super-
+draft entry, set automatically at propose time from the session user.
+The §13.1 claim flow remains available for *additional* owners. No
+schema changes, no env-var changes, no API-shape changes; only newly
+proposed RFCs receive the auto-owner — existing super-drafts whose
+`owners:` is empty are unaffected and can still be claimed via §13.1
+as before. This is a §19.3 rule-2 spec correction: `SPEC.md` §9.1,
+§9.2, and §13.1 are updated to reflect the new shape.
+
+### Changed
+
+- **`POST /api/rfcs/propose`** (`backend/app/api.py`) now sets
+  `Entry.owners = [user.gitea_login]` when constructing the new
+  super-draft entry, instead of `owners=[]`. The session's
+  `gitea_login` is the canonical source; the endpoint never accepted
+  an owner field from the request payload and still doesn't.
+- **`SPEC.md` §9.1** narrowed: the "no proposed-owner or working-
+  group fields" sentence becomes a proposer-owner-auto / working-
+  group-deferred split, with a §19.3 rule-2 note.
+- **`SPEC.md` §9.2** frontmatter shape: `owners: []` → `owners:
+  [<proposer.gitea_login>]`, with a §19.3 rule-2 note.
+- **`SPEC.md` §13.1** reframed: claim flow is now a graduation-time
+  broadening for additional owners, not a precondition for the
+  proposer's own RFC. The §13.1 / §13.2 / §13.3 graduation pipeline
+  itself is unchanged — the "at least one owner" precondition for
+  graduation still holds and is now satisfied by default.
+
+### Upgrade steps (from 0.3.0)
+
+1. The deployment **MUST** rebuild and restart per the routine
+   deploy steps. No `.env` changes, no schema/migration changes, no
+   API-shape changes.
+2. Operators **SHOULD** note that newly proposed RFCs after the
+   upgrade carry the proposer in `owners:` automatically. Existing
+   super-drafts with empty `owners:` are not migrated; they remain
+   claimable via the §13.1 flow exactly as before. No deployment-
+   side data action is required.
+3. Deployments **MAY** communicate the UX shift to active proposers
+   (the "Claim ownership" affordance no longer applies to your own
+   newly proposed RFC), but the affordance simply hides on RFCs the
+   viewer already owns, so no operator-side action is required.
+
 ## 0.3.0 — 2026-05-27
 
 **Minor — operator action required if a deployment wants to enable the

SPEC.md

@@ -253,13 +253,18 @@ and exact columns are illustrative; the implementing session can adjust.
 - `threads` — every conversation in the system, whether scoped to an RFC's
   main view, a branch, or a span within a branch's document. Columns:
   `id`, `rfc_slug`, `branch_name` (nullable — null means scoped to the
-  RFC's main view), `anchor_kind` (`whole-doc` | `range` | `paragraph`),
+  RFC's main view, the PR-less per-RFC discussion surface per §10's
+  closing note; non-null means scoped to a branch's work, including
+  PR-comment threads), `anchor_kind` (`whole-doc` | `range` | `paragraph`),
   `anchor_payload` (JSON: serialized ProseMirror range or paragraph id),
   `thread_kind` (`chat` | `flag` | `review` — `review` is the diff-anchored
   PR-review thread defined in §10.4), `label` (short human-authored summary;
   for flags this is the entire content), `state` (`open` | `resolved` |
   `stale`), `created_by`, `created_at`, `resolved_at`, `resolved_by`.
-  Visibility is derived from the underlying branch (§11.1).
+  Visibility is derived from the underlying branch (§11.1); for the
+  null-branch PR-less discussion surface, visibility follows the RFC
+  (anonymous read open per the §14 / v0.3.0 contract, write requires
+  contributor per §6.1, tightened toward anon-write-refused in v0.6.0).
 - `thread_messages` — the actual chat content for `chat`-kind threads.
   Columns: `id`, `thread_id`, `role` (`user` | `assistant` | `system`),
   `author_user_id` (nullable; null for assistant), `model_id` (nullable;
@@ -1120,12 +1125,20 @@ The modal collects four fields:
   type their own.
 
 No proposer name or email — the logged-in identity is canonical and
-need not be retyped. No proposed-owner or working-group fields —
-ownership flows through the post-merge claim flow (§13.1), and
+need not be retyped. No proposer-owner field either: the proposer is
+implicitly the first owner of their own RFC, set automatically at
+submit-time from the session user (see §9.2); the post-merge claim
+flow (§13.1) remains for *other* contributors to add themselves as
+owners on an RFC they didn't propose. No working-group field —
 arbiters are admin work, not the proposer's call. AI's drafting role
 is intentionally narrow: tag suggestions only. The proposer is
 making a specific claim about a specific word, and having AI propose
-the claim for them would undercut the gesture.
+the claim for them would undercut the gesture. (§19.3 rule-2
+correction: 0.4.0 narrowed this paragraph; the prior version asserted
+"no proposed-owner field" without qualification, but running code
+revealed that forcing a separate claim-flow gesture for the
+proposer's own RFC was UX friction with no benefit — the proposer
+already self-identified by proposing.)
 
 Primary action: **"Open proposal PR"** — naming the actual Git
 artifact produced, consistent with §10.1's *Open PR* and §13's
@@ -1141,7 +1154,13 @@ is populated from the modal and session:
 - `state: super-draft`, `id: null`, `repo: null`,
   `graduated_at: null`, `graduated_by: null` — fixed at creation.
 - `proposed_by: <session email>`, `proposed_at: <today>` — auto.
-- `owners: []` — empty; the claim flow (§13.1) fills this.
+- `owners: [<proposer.gitea_login>]` — the proposer is the first
+  owner at propose time, set automatically from the session user.
+  The §13.1 claim flow remains available for *additional* owners on
+  the same entry. (§19.3 rule-2 correction: 0.4.0 changed this from
+  `owners: []`; the prior shape required a separate claim-flow
+  gesture for the proposer's own RFC, which running code surfaced
+  as needless UX friction.)
 - `arbiters: []` — empty; arbiters are admin work, not the
   proposer's call.
 
@@ -1625,6 +1644,40 @@ framework's evidence unit; admitting plumbing commits — "fix merge
 conflict with main" — into that timeline would dilute the signal each
 commit is meant to carry.
 
+### 10.10 PR-less discussion vs. contribution
+
+PR comments and branch chat (§10.4, §8.4) are PR-scoped: they live on
+the `threads` rows whose `branch_name` names a branch (the PR's head
+or, pre-PR, a feature branch). They are the right surface for *this
+specific proposed change*. They are not the right surface for "what
+about this part of the RFC overall?" or "have we considered…?" — a
+question that doesn't yet warrant cutting a branch and that would
+distort a PR's review timeline if it landed there.
+
+The RFC view carries a **discussion surface** distinct from PR
+comments. Its substrate is `threads` rows whose `branch_name IS NULL`
+(§5) — the same conversation table used by branch chat, with the
+nullable column doing the segregating. Posting a discussion thread or
+message does not open a PR; the §1 chokepoint is unaffected because
+chat messages never produced Git writes. Contribution — proposing
+edits the document will land — still requires opening a PR via the
+§10.1 affordance.
+
+The distinction in one line: **discussion is what the RFC is for;
+contribution is how the RFC changes.** Either is honest; conflating
+them was the failure mode of generic-PR-comments-as-only-conversation.
+
+Reads on the discussion surface follow §14 / the v0.3.0 anonymous-read
+contract: anyone can see the conversation. Writes require contributor
+role per §6.1 (v0.5.0 implements the gate; v0.6.0 — item #4 — hardens
+adjacent surfaces to match). The 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; the §15.7 reconciler and §15 inbox prose render
+identically whether the chat lives on a branch or on the RFC's
+discussion surface. A distinct `open_rfc_discussion_thread` event
+kind is a §19.2 candidate if evidence demands the split.
+
 ---
 
 ## 11. Branches and PRs: visibility, contribute, lifecycle
@@ -1718,11 +1771,20 @@ PR do not block graduation; they remain on the meta repo subject to
 
 ### 13.1 Claim ownership (prerequisite)
 
-If a super-draft has no owner, any signed-in contributor can click
-"Claim ownership," which opens a PR against the meta repo adding their
-username to the `owners:` field of the entry. Owners and admins can
-merge. (A self-merge window for un-acted claims is not enabled in v1;
-configurable later if needed.) Multiple claims simply append.
+The proposer is already the first owner of any super-draft they
+proposed (per §9.2; auto-set at propose time). The claim flow exists
+for *additional* contributors to become owners on an existing super-
+draft — typically a draft whose proposer has stepped away, or a draft
+graduating with a working group. Any signed-in contributor can click
+"Claim ownership," which opens a PR against the meta repo adding
+their username to the `owners:` field of the entry. Owners and admins
+can merge. (A self-merge window for un-acted claims is not enabled in
+v1; configurable later if needed.) Multiple claims simply append.
+(§19.3 rule-2 correction: 0.4.0 narrowed this section's framing; the
+prior version implied owners always started empty and the claim flow
+was a hard prerequisite to graduation, but with the proposer now
+auto-set as first owner, the claim flow is a graduation-time
+broadening rather than a precondition for the proposer's own RFC.)
 
 ### 13.2 The Graduate dialog
 
@@ -2529,6 +2591,26 @@ The follow-up session will refine this. A minimal starting set:
 - `POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/branches/<branch>/threads/<thread_id>/resolve`
   — resolve a thread per §8.12; permission per the rules in that
   section.
+- `GET  /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads` — list threads on the
+  RFC's PR-less discussion surface per §10.10 (rows where
+  `threads.branch_name IS NULL`). Anonymous-readable per the v0.3.0
+  anonymous-read contract; the default whole-doc chat thread is
+  materialized lazily on first read, mirroring the §8.12 branch-chat
+  default.
+- `POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads` — open a discussion
+  thread per §10.10. Body: optional `label` (short summary), optional
+  first `message`. Writes require contributor role; anonymous viewers
+  receive 401. Thread is created with `anchor_kind='whole-doc'`,
+  `thread_kind='chat'`, `branch_name=NULL`.
+- `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 into a discussion thread per §10.10. Body: `text`,
+  optional `quote`. Writes require contributor role.
+- `POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads/<thread_id>/resolve` —
+  resolve a discussion thread per §10.10; permission collapses to the
+  thread creator, any RFC owner / arbiter per §6.3, and any app
+  admin / owner per §6.1.
 - `POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/branches/<branch>/open-pr` — open a PR per
   §10.1; body carries the AI-drafted (and possibly edited) title and
   description.
@@ -3264,6 +3346,55 @@ binding.
   ("operators MAY configure their monitoring to probe `/api/health`;
   the endpoint is unauthenticated by design"). §17 now lists the
   endpoint in its illustrative table.*
+- **PR-less discussion: range and paragraph anchors.** v0.5.0 lands
+  the structural discussion surface (§10.10) but constrains every
+  PR-less thread to `anchor_kind='whole-doc'` — the data model permits
+  `range` and `paragraph` anchors (§5) but the UI work to surface a
+  passage-anchored thread on a non-branch view is the deferred half.
+  The natural follow-on is a margin-icon affordance on the main view
+  matching §8.12's branch-side surface, with the anchor stored on the
+  null-branch thread. Earns its session when discussion volume warrants
+  the precision; v0.5.0's flat surface is sufficient for most "have we
+  considered…?" gestures. Touches §10.10 and §8.12.
+- **PR-less discussion: distinct notification event_kinds.** v0.5.0
+  routes per-RFC discussion messages through the existing
+  `chat_message_in_participated_thread` and `chat_reply_to_my_message`
+  event kinds with `branch_name=null` on the fan-out row. The inbox
+  prose reads identically whether the chat lives on a branch or on the
+  RFC's discussion surface, which is honest signal: the conversation
+  shape is the same; only the scope differs. A future session may
+  introduce `open_rfc_discussion_thread` / `post_rfc_discussion_message`
+  if evidence shows contributors want to filter discussion-vs-branch
+  chat distinctly in the §15.2 inbox. Touches §15.1 (the event_kind
+  enum), §15.2 (the inbox filter chips), and §10.10.
+- **PR-less discussion: chat-seen cursor.** §15.7 commits the
+  `branch_chat_seen` cursor for branch-scoped chat. The PR-less
+  discussion surface has no equivalent cursor in v0.5.0; the inbox
+  reconciler's keying on `(rfc_slug, branch_name)` does match a
+  null-branch advance, but no write path advances it. A natural
+  follow-on is a sibling table — `rfc_discussion_seen` or a
+  null-branch row on `branch_chat_seen` — that the discussion panel
+  advances on read, closing the §15.7 reconciliation loop for
+  discussion-surface notifications. Defer-able until inbox volume on
+  the new surface shows it matters.
+- **PR-less discussion: AI participation.** v0.5.0's discussion
+  surface is human-only — no AI participant invocation, no `<change>`
+  block parsing, no per-thread model picker. The branch chat (§8.12)
+  retains the §18 AI surface. The natural follow-on is wiring the AI
+  participant into discussion threads (the model picker, the
+  `Ask Claude` button on a selection tooltip) without enabling
+  document edits — a discussion-only AI turn produces only chat
+  content, no `changes` row, no commit. Contribution still requires a
+  PR; the AI's discussion-side help is just better prompts. Touches
+  §10.10, §8.12, and §18.
+- **PR-less discussion: anonymous read polish.** v0.5.0 inherits the
+  v0.3.0 anonymous-read contract — anyone can read; only signed-in
+  contributors can write. The composer affordance for anonymous
+  viewers ("Sign in to comment.") matches the existing read-only-bar
+  treatment but the surface has not yet been audited for the v0.6.0
+  hardening that tightens write gates app-wide. The §19.2 "public
+  face of discuss mode" entry overlaps; this entry is its discussion-
+  surface variant.
 - **Deployment-supplied subject framing.** The framework was built
   with one deployment in mind (OHM, standardizing natural-language
   vocabulary), but the substrate generalizes to any domain that

VERSION

@@ -1 +1 @@
-0.3.0
+0.5.0

backend/app/api.py

@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
 from . import (
     api_admin,
     api_branches,
+    api_discussion,
     api_graduation,
     api_notifications,
     api_prs,
@@ -81,6 +82,12 @@ def make_router(
     # the §15.8 mute typeahead) and the §6/§17 admin surfaces
     # (role, write-mute, audit-log, graduation-readiness queue).
     router.include_router(api_admin.make_router(config))
+    # v0.5.0: §5 / §7 / §10 — PR-less per-RFC discussion endpoints.
+    # The substrate is the existing threads/thread_messages tables;
+    # rows whose branch_name IS NULL scope to the RFC's main view.
+    # Contribution still requires a PR (api_prs above); this surface
+    # is for discussion that does not yet warrant a branch.
+    router.include_router(api_discussion.make_router())
 
     # ---------------------------------------------------------------
     # §17: /api/health — unauthenticated post-flight probe.
@@ -298,7 +305,11 @@ def make_router(
             proposed_at=entry_mod.today(),
             graduated_at=None,
             graduated_by=None,
-            owners=[],
+            # §9.2: the proposer is the implicit first owner at propose time.
+            # The §13.1 claim flow exists for *other* contributors to become
+            # owners on an RFC they didn't propose; the proposer never needs
+            # to claim their own RFC.
+            owners=[user.gitea_login],
             arbiters=[],
             tags=[t.strip() for t in payload.tags if t.strip()],
             body=payload.pitch.strip() + "\n",

backend/app/api_discussion.py

@@ -0,0 +1,330 @@
+"""§5 / §7 / §10 — PR-less per-RFC discussion endpoints (v0.5.0).
+
+This module surfaces the discussion-without-PR shape committed by the
+roadmap's item #3. The substrate is the existing `threads` /
+`thread_messages` pair from §5: rows whose `branch_name` is NULL are
+scoped to the RFC's main view (the schema comment on the column says
+exactly this; until now no write path produced such rows). This module
+is the read+write surface for those rows.
+
+Contribution still requires a PR: the §10 PR flow is unchanged, the
+branch-scoped chat in `api_branches.py` is unchanged, and accept /
+decline of AI `<change>` blocks still lives on a branch. What this
+module adds is the "discuss freely about the RFC, no branch yet" surface
+— a place to drop a question, a flag-style observation, or a multi-turn
+conversation that does not yet warrant cutting a branch.
+
+Auth shape mirrors the v0.3.0 anonymous-read contract: reads are open,
+writes require `auth.require_contributor`. Item #4 ("anon discuss/
+contribute off-limits") tightens the read gate in v0.6.0; v0.5.0's
+write gate already holds the line.
+
+Notification routing reuses the existing `fan_out_chat_message` path
+with `branch_name=None`; the `notifications.branch_name` column is
+nullable, and the inbox row prose ("@alice posted a chat message on
+<RFC title>") renders identically whether the chat lives on a branch
+or on the RFC's discussion surface. The existing
+`chat_message_in_participated_thread` / `chat_reply_to_my_message`
+event kinds carry both shapes; introducing a parallel
+`open_rfc_discussion_thread` / `post_rfc_discussion_message` enum pair
+would split routing without adding signal. The §15 §19.2 candidate
+"distinct event_kinds for PR-less discussion" notes the option for a
+future session if evidence demands the split.
+"""
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+import json
+import logging
+from typing import Any
+
+from fastapi import APIRouter, HTTPException, Request
+from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
+
+from . import auth, chat as chat_layer, db
+
+log = logging.getLogger(__name__)
+
+
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Request bodies
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+class DiscussionThreadCreateBody(BaseModel):
+    """A discussion thread is a `thread_kind='chat'`, `anchor_kind='whole-doc'`,
+    `branch_name=NULL` row. Anchored-range / per-paragraph threads on the
+    RFC discussion surface are a §19.2 candidate — the schema supports
+    them; the UI work to surface a range-anchor on a non-branch view is
+    the deferred part. v0.5.0 keeps the shape narrow."""
+    label: str | None = Field(default=None, max_length=400)
+    message: str | None = Field(default=None, max_length=20_000)
+
+
+class DiscussionMessageBody(BaseModel):
+    text: str = Field(min_length=1, max_length=20_000)
+    quote: str | None = Field(default=None, max_length=2000)
+
+
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Router
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def make_router() -> APIRouter:
+    router = APIRouter()
+
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+    # GET /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads
+    # Lists every PR-less thread on the RFC. The default whole-doc thread
+    # is materialized lazily on first list (mirroring the §8.12 branch-
+    # chat default-thread treatment) so the UI always has a target for
+    # the compose-message affordance.
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+    @router.get("/api/rfcs/{slug}/discussion/threads")
+    async def list_discussion_threads(slug: str, request: Request) -> dict[str, Any]:
+        viewer = auth.current_user(request)
+        _require_rfc_readable(slug)
+        # Ensure the default whole-doc discussion thread exists. We mint
+        # it on first read regardless of viewer (anonymous viewers can
+        # trigger the creation — the row's `created_by` is null in that
+        # case, mirroring `_ensure_branch_chat_thread`).
+        _ensure_discussion_thread(slug, viewer)
+        rows = db.conn().execute(
+            """
+            SELECT id, anchor_kind, anchor_payload, thread_kind, label, state,
+                   created_by, created_at, resolved_at, resolved_by
+              FROM threads
+             WHERE rfc_slug = ? AND branch_name IS NULL
+             ORDER BY id
+            """,
+            (slug,),
+        ).fetchall()
+        return {"items": [_serialize_thread(r) for r in rows]}
+
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+    # POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads
+    # Open a fresh discussion thread. Writes require require_contributor
+    # — anonymous viewers can read but cannot open a thread, per item
+    # #4's hardening anticipated in v0.6.0 (we already enforce it here
+    # to avoid the open window).
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+    @router.post("/api/rfcs/{slug}/discussion/threads")
+    async def create_discussion_thread(
+        slug: str, body: DiscussionThreadCreateBody, request: Request
+    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
+        viewer = auth.require_contributor(request)
+        _require_rfc_readable(slug)
+        cur = db.conn().execute(
+            """
+            INSERT INTO threads
+                (rfc_slug, branch_name, anchor_kind, anchor_payload,
+                 thread_kind, label, created_by)
+            VALUES (?, NULL, 'whole-doc', NULL, 'chat', ?, ?)
+            """,
+            (slug, body.label, viewer.user_id),
+        )
+        thread_id = cur.lastrowid
+        message_id = None
+        if body.message:
+            message_id = chat_layer.append_user_message(
+                thread_id=thread_id,
+                author_user_id=viewer.user_id,
+                text=body.message,
+                quote=None,
+            )
+        return {"thread_id": thread_id, "message_id": message_id}
+
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+    # GET /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads/<thread_id>/messages
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+    @router.get("/api/rfcs/{slug}/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/messages")
+    async def get_discussion_thread_messages(
+        slug: str, thread_id: int, request: Request
+    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
+        _viewer = auth.current_user(request)
+        _require_rfc_readable(slug)
+        thread = _require_discussion_thread(slug, thread_id)
+        rows = db.conn().execute(
+            """
+            SELECT m.id, m.role, m.author_user_id,
+                   u.gitea_login AS author_login,
+                   u.display_name AS author_display,
+                   m.model_id, m.text, m.quote, m.created_at
+              FROM thread_messages m
+         LEFT JOIN users u ON u.id = m.author_user_id
+             WHERE m.thread_id = ?
+             ORDER BY m.id
+            """,
+            (thread_id,),
+        ).fetchall()
+        return {
+            "thread": _serialize_thread(thread),
+            "messages": [_serialize_message(r) for r in rows],
+        }
+
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+    # POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads/<thread_id>/messages
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+    @router.post("/api/rfcs/{slug}/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/messages")
+    async def post_discussion_message(
+        slug: str, thread_id: int, body: DiscussionMessageBody, request: Request
+    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
+        viewer = auth.require_contributor(request)
+        _require_rfc_readable(slug)
+        _require_discussion_thread(slug, thread_id)
+        message_id = chat_layer.append_user_message(
+            thread_id=thread_id,
+            author_user_id=viewer.user_id,
+            text=body.text,
+            quote=body.quote,
+        )
+        return {"ok": True, "message_id": message_id}
+
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+    # POST /api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/threads/<thread_id>/resolve
+    # -------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+    @router.post("/api/rfcs/{slug}/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/resolve")
+    async def resolve_discussion_thread(
+        slug: str, thread_id: int, request: Request
+    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
+        viewer = auth.require_contributor(request)
+        rfc = _require_rfc_readable(slug)
+        thread = _require_discussion_thread(slug, thread_id)
+        if not _can_resolve(rfc, thread, viewer):
+            raise HTTPException(
+                403,
+                "Only the thread creator, an RFC owner/arbiter, or an app admin/owner may resolve",
+            )
+        db.conn().execute(
+            """
+            UPDATE threads
+               SET state = 'resolved',
+                   resolved_by = ?,
+                   resolved_at = datetime('now')
+             WHERE id = ?
+            """,
+            (viewer.user_id, thread_id),
+        )
+        return {"ok": True, "thread_id": thread_id}
+
+    return router
+
+
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Helpers
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def _require_rfc_readable(slug: str):
+    """Per the v0.3.0 anonymous-read contract: any cached RFC is readable
+    by anyone. Withdrawn entries refuse reads of every shape — same rule
+    `_require_rfc_with_repo` in `api_branches.py` follows."""
+    row = db.conn().execute(
+        "SELECT * FROM cached_rfcs WHERE slug = ?", (slug,)
+    ).fetchone()
+    if row is None:
+        raise HTTPException(404, "RFC not found")
+    if row["state"] == "withdrawn":
+        raise HTTPException(409, "RFC is withdrawn")
+    return row
+
+
+def _require_discussion_thread(slug: str, thread_id: int):
+    """A discussion thread is one whose (rfc_slug, branch_name) = (slug,
+    NULL). Refuse cleanly if the thread id resolves to a branch-scoped
+    thread instead — that lookup belongs on the branch endpoints."""
+    row = db.conn().execute(
+        """
+        SELECT * FROM threads
+         WHERE id = ? AND rfc_slug = ? AND branch_name IS NULL
+        """,
+        (thread_id, slug),
+    ).fetchone()
+    if not row:
+        raise HTTPException(404, "Discussion thread not found")
+    return row
+
+
+def _ensure_discussion_thread(slug: str, viewer) -> int:
+    """Per the §8.12 lazy-create pattern, materialize a default whole-doc
+    chat thread on the RFC's discussion surface on first read. Created_by
+    is null when an anonymous viewer triggers creation — the thread is
+    structurally owned by the RFC, not by whoever opened the view."""
+    row = db.conn().execute(
+        """
+        SELECT id FROM threads
+         WHERE rfc_slug = ? AND branch_name IS NULL
+           AND anchor_kind = 'whole-doc' AND thread_kind = 'chat'
+         ORDER BY id LIMIT 1
+        """,
+        (slug,),
+    ).fetchone()
+    if row:
+        return row["id"]
+    cur = db.conn().execute(
+        """
+        INSERT INTO threads
+            (rfc_slug, branch_name, anchor_kind, thread_kind, label, created_by)
+        VALUES (?, NULL, 'whole-doc', 'chat', NULL, ?)
+        """,
+        (slug, viewer.user_id if viewer else None),
+    )
+    return cur.lastrowid
+
+
+def _can_resolve(rfc, thread, viewer) -> bool:
+    if viewer is None:
+        return False
+    if viewer.role in ("owner", "admin"):
+        return True
+    owners = json.loads(rfc["owners_json"] or "[]")
+    arbiters = json.loads(rfc["arbiters_json"] or "[]")
+    if viewer.gitea_login in owners or viewer.gitea_login in arbiters:
+        return True
+    if thread["created_by"] == viewer.user_id:
+        return True
+    return False
+
+
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Serializers — mirror api_branches.py's shape
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def _serialize_thread(row) -> dict[str, Any]:
+    payload = row["anchor_payload"]
+    try:
+        anchor = json.loads(payload) if payload else None
+    except Exception:
+        anchor = None
+    return {
+        "id": row["id"],
+        "anchor_kind": row["anchor_kind"],
+        "anchor_payload": anchor,
+        "thread_kind": row["thread_kind"],
+        "label": row["label"],
+        "state": row["state"],
+        "created_by": row["created_by"],
+        "created_at": row["created_at"],
+        "resolved_at": row["resolved_at"] if "resolved_at" in row.keys() else None,
+        "resolved_by": row["resolved_by"] if "resolved_by" in row.keys() else None,
+    }
+
+
+def _serialize_message(row) -> dict[str, Any]:
+    return {
+        "id": row["id"],
+        "role": row["role"],
+        "author_user_id": row["author_user_id"],
+        "author_login": row["author_login"],
+        "author_display": row["author_display"],
+        "model_id": row["model_id"],
+        "text": row["text"],
+        "quote": row["quote"],
+        "created_at": row["created_at"],
+    }

backend/app/chat.py

@@ -168,10 +168,15 @@ def _fan_out_chat(thread_id: int, author_user_id: int, message_id: int) -> None:
         ).fetchone()
         if pr_row:
             pr_number = pr_row["pr_number"]
+    # v0.5.0 (§5 / §10 — PR-less discussion): a thread with
+    # branch_name IS NULL is scoped to the RFC's main view. Pass None
+    # through to the notify chokepoint so the notifications row keeps
+    # `branch_name` null — coercing it to "main" would misroute the
+    # §15.7 chat-seen reconciler (which keys on branch_name).
     notify.fan_out_chat_message(
         actor_user_id=author_user_id,
         rfc_slug=row["rfc_slug"],
-        branch_name=row["branch_name"] or "main",
+        branch_name=row["branch_name"],
         thread_id=thread_id,
         message_id=message_id,
         is_review_thread=(row["thread_kind"] == "review"),

backend/app/notify.py

@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ def fan_out_chat_message(
     *,
     actor_user_id: int,
     rfc_slug: str,
-    branch_name: str,
+    branch_name: str | None,
     thread_id: int,
     message_id: int,
     is_review_thread: bool = False,
@@ -227,6 +227,14 @@ def fan_out_chat_message(
     (state='watching', i.e. full stream) get a churn-class
     `chat_message_in_participated_thread`. The two are union'd so a user
     who is both gets only the personal-direct row.
+
+    v0.5.0: `branch_name` may be None — that is the PR-less per-RFC
+    discussion shape (`threads.branch_name IS NULL`, §5). The
+    notifications row carries the null through; the inbox prose renders
+    identically whether the chat lives on a branch or on the RFC's
+    discussion surface, and the §15.7 reconciler keys on
+    (rfc_slug, branch_name) so a null branch correctly matches the
+    PR-less discussion's eventual chat-seen-equivalent advance.
     """
     _bump_auto_watch(actor_user_id, rfc_slug)
 

backend/tests/test_discussion_vertical.py

@@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
+"""End-to-end integration tests for the v0.5.0 PR-less discussion
+surface — roadmap item #3, "discussion without PR; contribution requires
+PR."
+
+The vertical: an active RFC exists; the discussion endpoints under
+`/api/rfcs/<slug>/discussion/...` open threads with
+`threads.branch_name IS NULL`, post messages into them, and surface
+them on subsequent reads. Branch-scoped threads (the §8.12 surface)
+remain segregated. Anonymous viewers can read; only signed-in
+contributors can write.
+"""
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+import pytest
+
+# Reuse the harness from Slice 1 / Slice 2.
+from test_propose_vertical import (  # noqa: F401 — fixtures land via import
+    FakeGitea,
+    app_with_fake_gitea,
+    provision_user_row,
+    sign_in_as,
+    tmp_env,
+)
+from test_rfc_view_vertical import seed_active_rfc, SEED_BODY
+
+
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Tests
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+
+def test_create_and_post_to_pr_less_discussion_thread(app_with_fake_gitea):
+    """The vertical: signed-in contributor opens a thread on the RFC's
+    discussion surface, posts a message, and the thread + message
+    surface on subsequent reads with branch_name IS NULL."""
+    from fastapi.testclient import TestClient
+    from app import db
+
+    app, fake = app_with_fake_gitea
+    with TestClient(app) as client:
+        provision_user_row(user_id=1, login="alice", role="contributor")
+        seed_active_rfc(fake, slug="ohm", title="OHM", body=SEED_BODY)
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=1, gitea_login="alice", display_name="Alice", role="contributor")
+
+        # Listing materializes the default whole-doc thread.
+        r = client.get("/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads")
+        assert r.status_code == 200, r.text
+        items = r.json()["items"]
+        assert len(items) == 1
+        default_thread_id = items[0]["id"]
+        assert items[0]["anchor_kind"] == "whole-doc"
+        assert items[0]["thread_kind"] == "chat"
+
+        # Open an additional discussion thread with a first message.
+        r = client.post(
+            "/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads",
+            json={"label": "Question about §3", "message": "Is consent baked into the trait model?"},
+        )
+        assert r.status_code == 200, r.text
+        payload = r.json()
+        thread_id = payload["thread_id"]
+        message_id = payload["message_id"]
+        assert thread_id is not None and message_id is not None
+
+        # Confirm the row carries branch_name IS NULL (the PR-less shape).
+        row = db.conn().execute(
+            "SELECT rfc_slug, branch_name, thread_kind, anchor_kind, created_by FROM threads WHERE id = ?",
+            (thread_id,),
+        ).fetchone()
+        assert row["rfc_slug"] == "ohm"
+        assert row["branch_name"] is None
+        assert row["thread_kind"] == "chat"
+        assert row["anchor_kind"] == "whole-doc"
+        assert row["created_by"] == 1
+
+        # The thread surfaces on the list endpoint alongside the default.
+        r = client.get("/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads")
+        ids = [t["id"] for t in r.json()["items"]]
+        assert default_thread_id in ids
+        assert thread_id in ids
+
+        # Posting a reply on the new thread persists and returns the id.
+        r = client.post(
+            f"/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/messages",
+            json={"text": "Following up — see §3.2."},
+        )
+        assert r.status_code == 200, r.text
+        reply_id = r.json()["message_id"]
+
+        # The messages read endpoint returns both messages in order.
+        r = client.get(f"/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/messages")
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+        messages = r.json()["messages"]
+        assert [m["id"] for m in messages] == [message_id, reply_id]
+        assert messages[0]["author_login"] == "alice"
+        assert messages[0]["text"].startswith("Is consent")
+
+
+def test_anonymous_can_read_but_cannot_post_discussion(app_with_fake_gitea):
+    """Per the v0.3.0 anonymous-read contract: reads on the discussion
+    surface are open; write attempts return 401. v0.6.0 (item #4) will
+    tighten the read gate — v0.5.0 holds the write line so there is no
+    open window between releases."""
+    from fastapi.testclient import TestClient
+
+    app, fake = app_with_fake_gitea
+    with TestClient(app) as client:
+        provision_user_row(user_id=2, login="alice", role="contributor")
+        seed_active_rfc(fake, slug="ohm", title="OHM", body=SEED_BODY)
+
+        # Seed the discussion thread + first message as Alice.
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=2, gitea_login="alice", display_name="Alice", role="contributor")
+        r = client.post(
+            "/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads",
+            json={"message": "First."},
+        )
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+        thread_id = r.json()["thread_id"]
+
+        # Drop the session — viewer is anonymous now.
+        client.cookies.clear()
+
+        # Reads are open.
+        r = client.get("/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads")
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+        assert any(t["id"] == thread_id for t in r.json()["items"])
+
+        r = client.get(f"/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/messages")
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+        assert len(r.json()["messages"]) >= 1
+
+        # Writes refuse 401.
+        r = client.post(
+            "/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads",
+            json={"message": "Drive-by."},
+        )
+        assert r.status_code == 401
+
+        r = client.post(
+            f"/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/messages",
+            json={"text": "Drive-by reply."},
+        )
+        assert r.status_code == 401
+
+
+def test_discussion_threads_and_branch_threads_are_segregated(app_with_fake_gitea):
+    """A branch-scoped thread (the §8.12 surface, branch_name='main' or a
+    feature branch) MUST NOT surface on the discussion endpoint, which
+    is keyed on branch_name IS NULL. The two surfaces share a table; the
+    null-filter is what segregates them."""
+    from fastapi.testclient import TestClient
+    from app import db
+
+    app, fake = app_with_fake_gitea
+    with TestClient(app) as client:
+        provision_user_row(user_id=3, login="alice", role="contributor")
+        seed_active_rfc(fake, slug="ohm", title="OHM", body=SEED_BODY)
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=3, gitea_login="alice", display_name="Alice", role="contributor")
+
+        # Manually materialize a branch-scoped thread on a feature branch.
+        db.conn().execute(
+            """
+            INSERT INTO threads
+                (rfc_slug, branch_name, anchor_kind, thread_kind, label, created_by)
+            VALUES ('ohm', 'alice-draft-aa00', 'whole-doc', 'chat', NULL, 3)
+            """
+        )
+        # And one on the discussion surface.
+        r = client.post(
+            "/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads",
+            json={"message": "Discussion-surface message."},
+        )
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+        discussion_thread_id = r.json()["thread_id"]
+
+        # The discussion list contains the null-branch thread (plus the
+        # default whole-doc) and excludes the feature-branch thread.
+        r = client.get("/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads")
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+        ids = [t["id"] for t in r.json()["items"]]
+        assert discussion_thread_id in ids
+        # Feature-branch thread MUST NOT surface.
+        branch_thread_row = db.conn().execute(
+            "SELECT id FROM threads WHERE branch_name = 'alice-draft-aa00'"
+        ).fetchone()
+        assert branch_thread_row is not None
+        assert branch_thread_row["id"] not in ids
+
+
+def test_discussion_thread_resolve_permissions(app_with_fake_gitea):
+    """A thread's creator can resolve it; an unrelated contributor cannot;
+    an admin / owner / RFC-owner can. Mirrors §8.12's resolution rule for
+    branch-scoped threads."""
+    from fastapi.testclient import TestClient
+
+    app, fake = app_with_fake_gitea
+    with TestClient(app) as client:
+        provision_user_row(user_id=4, login="alice", role="contributor")
+        provision_user_row(user_id=5, login="bob", role="contributor")
+        provision_user_row(user_id=6, login="ben", role="owner")
+        seed_active_rfc(fake, slug="ohm", title="OHM", body=SEED_BODY)
+
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=4, gitea_login="alice", display_name="Alice", role="contributor")
+        r = client.post(
+            "/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads",
+            json={"label": "Alice's thread", "message": "..."},
+        )
+        thread_id = r.json()["thread_id"]
+
+        # Unrelated contributor refused.
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=5, gitea_login="bob", display_name="Bob", role="contributor")
+        r = client.post(f"/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/resolve")
+        assert r.status_code == 403
+
+        # Creator allowed.
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=4, gitea_login="alice", display_name="Alice", role="contributor")
+        r = client.post(f"/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads/{thread_id}/resolve")
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+
+        # Open another thread, resolve it as the owner.
+        r = client.post(
+            "/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads",
+            json={"label": "Another thread", "message": "..."},
+        )
+        thread_id2 = r.json()["thread_id"]
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=6, gitea_login="ben", display_name="Ben", role="owner")
+        r = client.post(f"/api/rfcs/ohm/discussion/threads/{thread_id2}/resolve")
+        assert r.status_code == 200
+
+
+def test_discussion_404_on_unknown_rfc(app_with_fake_gitea):
+    from fastapi.testclient import TestClient
+
+    app, _fake = app_with_fake_gitea
+    with TestClient(app) as client:
+        r = client.get("/api/rfcs/nonexistent/discussion/threads")
+        assert r.status_code == 404

backend/tests/test_propose_vertical.py

@@ -496,6 +496,11 @@ def test_propose_to_super_draft_vertical(app_with_fake_gitea):
         proposal = r.json()
         assert proposal["entry"]["title"] == "Open Human Model"
         assert proposal["entry"]["state"] == "super-draft"
+        # §9.2: the proposer is the implicit first owner at propose time.
+        # The owners field is a single-element list containing exactly the
+        # session user's gitea_login — no request-supplied owner field
+        # exists or is honored.
+        assert proposal["entry"]["owners"] == ["alice"]
         assert proposal["affordances"]["merge"] is True
 
         # Owner merges. The catalog picks up the new super-draft.
@@ -516,6 +521,10 @@ def test_propose_to_super_draft_vertical(app_with_fake_gitea):
         view = r.json()
         assert view["state"] == "super-draft"
         assert "shared definition" in view["body"]
+        # §9.2: the auto-set proposer-owner survives the meta-repo round-trip
+        # — it's in the file's frontmatter on main after merge, not just
+        # in the pending-PR view above.
+        assert view["owners"] == ["alice"]
 
         # The pending-ideas list no longer carries the merged proposal.
         r = client.get("/api/proposals")
@@ -568,6 +577,37 @@ def test_anonymous_cannot_propose(app_with_fake_gitea):
         assert r.status_code == 401
 
 
+def test_proposer_is_auto_owner_request_payload_ignored(app_with_fake_gitea):
+    """§9.2: the owners field on the new entry is always exactly
+    `[session.gitea_login]`. The propose endpoint never accepts an owner
+    from the client; a request payload that smuggles one in is ignored
+    by the Pydantic body model and the auto-set value lands instead.
+    """
+    from fastapi.testclient import TestClient
+    app, _fake = app_with_fake_gitea
+    with TestClient(app) as client:
+        provision_user_row(user_id=11, login="alice", role="contributor")
+        sign_in_as(client, user_id=11, gitea_login="alice", display_name="Alice", role="contributor")
+        # Extra unknown fields like `owners` are dropped by the
+        # ProposeBody model; the session user is the only source of truth.
+        r = client.post("/api/rfcs/propose", json={
+            "title": "Spoof attempt",
+            "slug": "spoof-attempt",
+            "pitch": "p",
+            "tags": [],
+            "owners": ["mallory", "eve"],
+            "proposed_by": "mallory@test",
+        })
+        assert r.status_code == 200, r.text
+        pr_number = r.json()["pr_number"]
+        r = client.get(f"/api/proposals/{pr_number}")
+        assert r.status_code == 200, r.text
+        entry = r.json()["entry"]
+        assert entry["owners"] == ["alice"]
+        # proposed_by also comes from the session, never the body.
+        assert entry["proposed_by"] in ("alice@test", "alice")
+
+
 def test_withdraw_by_proposer_works(app_with_fake_gitea):
     from fastapi.testclient import TestClient
     app, _fake = app_with_fake_gitea

frontend/package-lock.json

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 {
   "name": "rfc-app-frontend",
-  "version": "0.2.1",
+  "version": "0.5.0",
   "lockfileVersion": 3,
   "requires": true,
   "packages": {
     "": {
       "name": "rfc-app-frontend",
-      "version": "0.2.1",
+      "version": "0.5.0",
       "dependencies": {
         "@codemirror/commands": "^6.10.3",
         "@codemirror/lang-markdown": "^6.5.0",

frontend/package.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "name": "rfc-app-frontend",
   "private": true,
-  "version": "0.3.0",
+  "version": "0.5.0",
   "type": "module",
   "scripts": {
     "dev": "vite",

frontend/src/App.css

@@ -1776,3 +1776,91 @@
 .grad-queue-link:hover strong { text-decoration: underline; }
 .muted { color: #6b7280; }
 .error { color: #b91c1c; }
+
+/* v0.5.0 — PR-less per-RFC discussion panel (RFCDiscussionPanel.jsx).
+   Visual neighbor of .chat-panel but distinct: discussion lives on the
+   RFC, branch chat lives on the branch. Same flex column shape so it
+   slots cleanly into the existing .right-panel container.
+*/
+.discussion-panel {
+  flex: 1; display: flex; flex-direction: column;
+  overflow: hidden; min-height: 0;
+}
+.discussion-header {
+  padding: 10px 14px;
+  border-bottom: 1px solid #f0f0ee;
+  background: #fafafa;
+  display: flex; flex-direction: column; gap: 4px;
+}
+.discussion-header-title { font-size: 12px; color: #555; font-weight: 600; }
+.discussion-header-meta { font-size: 11px; color: #888; }
+.discussion-thread-tabs {
+  display: flex; gap: 4px; flex-wrap: wrap;
+  padding: 6px 14px;
+  border-bottom: 1px solid #f0f0ee;
+  background: #fcfcfb;
+}
+.discussion-thread-tab {
+  background: #fff; border: 1px solid #e5e5e0; cursor: pointer;
+  font-size: 11px; color: #555;
+  padding: 3px 8px; border-radius: 999px;
+}
+.discussion-thread-tab.active {
+  background: #eef2ff; border-color: #5b5bd6; color: #3737a0;
+}
+.discussion-thread-tab.resolved { opacity: 0.6; }
+.discussion-messages {
+  flex: 1; overflow-y: auto;
+  padding: 14px;
+  display: flex; flex-direction: column; gap: 10px;
+}
+.discussion-empty {
+  flex: 1; display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center;
+  text-align: center; padding: 24px;
+}
+.discussion-empty p {
+  font-size: 13px; color: #999; line-height: 1.6; max-width: 280px;
+}
+.discussion-error {
+  background: #fee; border: 1px solid #fcc; color: #b91c1c;
+  padding: 8px 10px; border-radius: 4px; font-size: 12px;
+}
+.discussion-message { display: flex; flex-direction: column; gap: 3px; }
+.discussion-message-meta {
+  display: flex; gap: 8px; font-size: 11px; color: #888;
+}
+.discussion-message-author { color: #5b5bd6; font-weight: 500; }
+.discussion-message-quote {
+  font-size: 11px; color: #666; font-style: italic;
+  border-left: 2px solid #ddd; padding-left: 8px; margin-bottom: 2px;
+}
+.discussion-message-body {
+  font-size: 13px; color: #222; line-height: 1.5;
+  white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;
+  background: #f7f7f5; padding: 8px 10px; border-radius: 6px;
+}
+.discussion-message.system .discussion-system-bubble {
+  font-size: 12px; color: #888; font-style: italic;
+  text-align: center; padding: 4px 0;
+}
+.discussion-composer {
+  border-top: 1px solid #f0f0ee;
+  padding: 10px 14px;
+  background: #fafafa;
+  display: flex; flex-direction: column; gap: 6px;
+}
+.discussion-composer-textarea {
+  width: 100%; resize: vertical; min-height: 60px;
+  font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px;
+  border: 1px solid #ddd; border-radius: 4px;
+  padding: 6px 8px;
+}
+.discussion-composer-textarea:focus {
+  outline: none; border-color: #5b5bd6;
+}
+.discussion-composer-actions {
+  display: flex; gap: 8px; align-items: center; justify-content: flex-end;
+}
+.discussion-readonly {
+  font-size: 12px; color: #666; padding: 4px 0;
+}

frontend/src/App.jsx

@@ -159,6 +159,7 @@ export default function App() {
       </div>
       {proposeOpen && viewer && (
         <ProposeModal
+          viewer={viewer}
           onClose={() => setProposeOpen(false)}
           onSubmitted={({ pr_number }) => {
             setProposeOpen(false)

frontend/src/api.js

@@ -197,6 +197,52 @@ export async function resolveThread(slug, branch, threadId) {
   return jsonOrThrow(res)
 }
 
+// ── v0.5.0: PR-less per-RFC discussion (§5 / §10) ────────────────────────
+//
+// The substrate is `threads.branch_name IS NULL` — the same threads
+// table the branch chat uses, with a null branch the schema already
+// supported. Contribution still requires a PR (api_prs / openPR), so
+// these endpoints are read+write for discussion only.
+
+export async function listDiscussionThreads(slug) {
+  return jsonOrThrow(await fetch(`/api/rfcs/${slug}/discussion/threads`))
+}
+
+export async function createDiscussionThread(slug, { label = null, message = null } = {}) {
+  const res = await fetch(`/api/rfcs/${slug}/discussion/threads`, {
+    method: 'POST',
+    headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
+    body: JSON.stringify({ label, message }),
+  })
+  return jsonOrThrow(res)
+}
+
+export async function getDiscussionThreadMessages(slug, threadId) {
+  return jsonOrThrow(await fetch(
+    `/api/rfcs/${slug}/discussion/threads/${threadId}/messages`,
+  ))
+}
+
+export async function postDiscussionMessage(slug, threadId, { text, quote = null }) {
+  const res = await fetch(
+    `/api/rfcs/${slug}/discussion/threads/${threadId}/messages`,
+    {
+      method: 'POST',
+      headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
+      body: JSON.stringify({ text, quote }),
+    },
+  )
+  return jsonOrThrow(res)
+}
+
+export async function resolveDiscussionThread(slug, threadId) {
+  const res = await fetch(
+    `/api/rfcs/${slug}/discussion/threads/${threadId}/resolve`,
+    { method: 'POST' },
+  )
+  return jsonOrThrow(res)
+}
+
 // ── Slice 4: super-draft body editing (§9.5) ─────────────────────────────
 
 export async function startEditBranch(slug, body = {}) {

frontend/src/components/ProposeModal.jsx

@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ function slugify(title) {
     .replace(/^-+|-+$/g, '')
 }
 
-export default function ProposeModal({ onClose, onSubmitted }) {
+export default function ProposeModal({ viewer, onClose, onSubmitted }) {
   const [title, setTitle] = useState('')
   const [slug, setSlug] = useState('')
   const [slugEdited, setSlugEdited] = useState(false)
@@ -131,6 +131,12 @@ export default function ProposeModal({ onClose, onSubmitted }) {
               </div>
             )}
 
+            {viewer && (
+              <p className="field-help" style={{ marginTop: 14, marginBottom: 0 }}>
+                Owner: <strong>{viewer.display_name || viewer.gitea_login}</strong> — you'll be the first owner of this super-draft. Additional owners can claim later (§13.1).
+              </p>
+            )}
+
             {error && <p className="field-error">{error}</p>}
           </div>
           <div className="modal-actions">

frontend/src/components/RFCDiscussionPanel.jsx

@@ -0,0 +1,290 @@
+// RFCDiscussionPanel.jsx — v0.5.0's PR-less per-RFC discussion surface.
+//
+// Roadmap item #3: an RFC's main view now has a discussion surface
+// distinct from PR comments and from branch chat. The substrate is the
+// existing threads/thread_messages tables — rows with
+// `threads.branch_name IS NULL` scope to "the RFC, no branch yet."
+//
+// Reused as the right-column panel on `branchParam === 'main'`. Branch
+// chat (ChatPanel.jsx) keeps its existing role for branch-scoped work,
+// including PRs. Contribution remains gated behind opening a PR —
+// nothing here writes to the document.
+
+import { useCallback, useEffect, useRef, useState } from 'react'
+import {
+  createDiscussionThread,
+  getDiscussionThreadMessages,
+  listDiscussionThreads,
+  postDiscussionMessage,
+  resolveDiscussionThread,
+} from '../api'
+
+export default function RFCDiscussionPanel({ slug, viewer }) {
+  const [threads, setThreads] = useState([])
+  const [messagesByThread, setMessagesByThread] = useState({})
+  const [composer, setComposer] = useState('')
+  const [activeThreadId, setActiveThreadId] = useState(null)
+  const [error, setError] = useState(null)
+  const [sending, setSending] = useState(false)
+  const bottomRef = useRef(null)
+
+  // Pull threads + messages on mount / slug change.
+  useEffect(() => {
+    if (!slug) return
+    let cancelled = false
+    setError(null)
+    setThreads([])
+    setMessagesByThread({})
+    setActiveThreadId(null)
+    listDiscussionThreads(slug)
+      .then(async ({ items }) => {
+        if (cancelled) return
+        setThreads(items || [])
+        // Pre-load messages for each thread. The list is small (per-RFC,
+        // not per-branch) so a fan-out fetch is fine; §19.2 candidate
+        // for paging if a hot RFC accumulates lots of threads.
+        const collected = {}
+        for (const t of items || []) {
+          try {
+            const { messages } = await getDiscussionThreadMessages(slug, t.id)
+            collected[t.id] = messages
+          } catch {
+            collected[t.id] = []
+          }
+        }
+        if (!cancelled) {
+          setMessagesByThread(collected)
+          // Default the active thread to the system's lazy whole-doc
+          // default (the first row with anchor_kind='whole-doc' and
+          // no label) so the composer wires to a real id immediately.
+          const dflt = (items || []).find(
+            t => t.anchor_kind === 'whole-doc' && !t.label,
+          )
+          setActiveThreadId(dflt?.id || items?.[0]?.id || null)
+        }
+      })
+      .catch(err => { if (!cancelled) setError(err.message) })
+    return () => { cancelled = true }
+  }, [slug])
+
+  // Scroll to bottom when messages land in the active thread.
+  useEffect(() => {
+    bottomRef.current?.scrollIntoView({ behavior: 'smooth' })
+  }, [activeThreadId, messagesByThread[activeThreadId]?.length])
+
+  const handleSend = useCallback(async () => {
+    if (!viewer) { window.location.href = '/auth/login'; return }
+    const text = composer.trim()
+    if (!text || sending) return
+    setSending(true)
+    setError(null)
+    try {
+      // If no thread yet, mint one with the message as its first turn.
+      if (!activeThreadId) {
+        const { thread_id, message_id } = await createDiscussionThread(slug, { message: text })
+        // Re-pull authoritative state — the default whole-doc thread
+        // existed pre-this call (the GET creates it lazily), so we
+        // either get the existing default's id back from the new
+        // thread's row or the prior default; either way the list call
+        // is the source of truth.
+        const { items } = await listDiscussionThreads(slug)
+        setThreads(items || [])
+        const { messages } = await getDiscussionThreadMessages(slug, thread_id)
+        setMessagesByThread(prev => ({ ...prev, [thread_id]: messages }))
+        setActiveThreadId(thread_id)
+        void message_id
+      } else {
+        const { message_id } = await postDiscussionMessage(slug, activeThreadId, { text })
+        const { messages } = await getDiscussionThreadMessages(slug, activeThreadId)
+        setMessagesByThread(prev => ({ ...prev, [activeThreadId]: messages }))
+        void message_id
+      }
+      setComposer('')
+    } catch (err) {
+      setError(err.message)
+    } finally {
+      setSending(false)
+    }
+  }, [composer, sending, viewer, slug, activeThreadId])
+
+  const handleNewThread = useCallback(async () => {
+    if (!viewer) { window.location.href = '/auth/login'; return }
+    setError(null)
+    try {
+      const { thread_id } = await createDiscussionThread(slug, { label: null, message: null })
+      const { items } = await listDiscussionThreads(slug)
+      setThreads(items || [])
+      setActiveThreadId(thread_id)
+      setMessagesByThread(prev => ({ ...prev, [thread_id]: [] }))
+    } catch (err) {
+      setError(err.message)
+    }
+  }, [viewer, slug])
+
+  const handleResolve = useCallback(async (threadId) => {
+    if (!viewer) return
+    setError(null)
+    try {
+      await resolveDiscussionThread(slug, threadId)
+      const { items } = await listDiscussionThreads(slug)
+      setThreads(items || [])
+    } catch (err) {
+      setError(err.message)
+    }
+  }, [viewer, slug])
+
+  const onKeyDown = useCallback((e) => {
+    if (e.key === 'Enter' && (e.metaKey || e.ctrlKey)) {
+      e.preventDefault()
+      handleSend()
+    }
+  }, [handleSend])
+
+  const activeThread = threads.find(t => t.id === activeThreadId) || null
+  const activeMessages = messagesByThread[activeThreadId] || []
+  const openThreads = threads.filter(t => t.state === 'open')
+
+  return (
+    <div className="discussion-panel">
+      <div className="discussion-header">
+        <span className="discussion-header-title">
+          Discussion <span className="beta-chip">Beta</span>
+        </span>
+        <span className="discussion-header-meta">
+          {openThreads.length} open thread{openThreads.length === 1 ? '' : 's'}
+          {' · '}contribution requires a PR
+        </span>
+      </div>
+
+      {threads.length > 1 && (
+        <div className="discussion-thread-tabs">
+          {threads.map(t => (
+            <button
+              key={t.id}
+              type="button"
+              className={`discussion-thread-tab ${t.id === activeThreadId ? 'active' : ''} ${t.state === 'resolved' ? 'resolved' : ''}`}
+              onClick={() => setActiveThreadId(t.id)}
+              title={t.label || (t.id === activeThreadId ? 'Current thread' : 'Open thread')}
+            >
+              {t.label || (t.anchor_kind === 'whole-doc' && !t.label ? 'General' : `Thread ${t.id}`)}
+              {t.state === 'resolved' && ' ✓'}
+            </button>
+          ))}
+        </div>
+      )}
+
+      <div className="discussion-messages">
+        {error && <div className="discussion-error">{error}</div>}
+        {activeMessages.length === 0 && !error && (
+          <div className="discussion-empty">
+            <p>
+              {viewer
+                ? 'No discussion yet. Be the first to comment — discussion lives here without opening a PR. To propose an edit, use Start Contributing above.'
+                : 'No discussion yet. Sign in to comment. Discussion lives here without opening a PR; proposed edits still flow through PRs.'}
+            </p>
+          </div>
+        )}
+        {activeMessages.map(msg => (
+          <DiscussionMessage key={msg.id} message={msg} />
+        ))}
+        <div ref={bottomRef} />
+      </div>
+
+      <div className="discussion-composer">
+        {viewer ? (
+          <>
+            <textarea
+              className="discussion-composer-textarea"
+              value={composer}
+              onChange={e => setComposer(e.target.value)}
+              onKeyDown={onKeyDown}
+              placeholder={
+                activeThread?.label
+                  ? `Reply in "${activeThread.label}" — Cmd/Ctrl+Enter to send`
+                  : 'Discuss this RFC — Cmd/Ctrl+Enter to send'
+              }
+              disabled={sending}
+              rows={3}
+            />
+            <div className="discussion-composer-actions">
+              <button
+                type="button"
+                className="btn-secondary"
+                onClick={handleNewThread}
+                disabled={sending}
+                title="Open a fresh discussion thread on this RFC"
+              >
+                New thread
+              </button>
+              {activeThread
+                && activeThread.state === 'open'
+                && (activeThread.created_by === viewer.user_id
+                    || viewer.role === 'owner'
+                    || viewer.role === 'admin') && (
+                <button
+                  type="button"
+                  className="btn-link"
+                  onClick={() => handleResolve(activeThread.id)}
+                  disabled={sending}
+                  title="Mark this discussion thread resolved"
+                >
+                  Resolve
+                </button>
+              )}
+              <button
+                type="button"
+                className="btn-primary"
+                onClick={handleSend}
+                disabled={sending || !composer.trim()}
+              >
+                {sending ? 'Sending…' : 'Send'}
+              </button>
+            </div>
+          </>
+        ) : (
+          <div className="discussion-readonly">
+            Read-only — <a href="/auth/login">sign in</a> to join the discussion.
+            Discussion is in private <strong>Beta</strong>.
+          </div>
+        )}
+      </div>
+    </div>
+  )
+}
+
+function DiscussionMessage({ message }) {
+  const isSystem = message.role === 'system'
+  if (isSystem) {
+    return (
+      <div className="discussion-message system">
+        <div className="discussion-system-bubble">{message.text}</div>
+      </div>
+    )
+  }
+  return (
+    <div className={`discussion-message ${message.role}`}>
+      <div className="discussion-message-meta">
+        <span className="discussion-message-author">
+          @{message.author_login || '—'}
+        </span>
+        <span className="discussion-message-time">
+          {formatTimestamp(message.created_at)}
+        </span>
+      </div>
+      {message.quote && (
+        <div className="discussion-message-quote">"{message.quote}"</div>
+      )}
+      <div className="discussion-message-body">{message.text}</div>
+    </div>
+  )
+}
+
+function formatTimestamp(ts) {
+  if (!ts) return ''
+  try {
+    const d = new Date(ts + (ts.endsWith('Z') ? '' : 'Z'))
+    return d.toLocaleString()
+  } catch {
+    return ts
+  }
+}

frontend/src/components/RFCView.jsx

@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ import MarkdownPreview from './MarkdownPreview.jsx'
 import SelectionTooltip from './SelectionTooltip.jsx'
 import PromptBar from './PromptBar.jsx'
 import ChatPanel from './ChatPanel.jsx'
+import RFCDiscussionPanel from './RFCDiscussionPanel.jsx'
 import ChangePanel, { diffWords } from './ChangePanel.jsx'
 import PRModal from './PRModal.jsx'
 import GraduateDialog from './GraduateDialog.jsx'
@@ -759,17 +760,25 @@ export default function RFCView({ viewer }) {
           data-open={drawerOpen ? 'true' : 'false'}
         />
         <div className={`right-panel${drawerOpen ? ' drawer-open' : ''}`} role="complementary">
-          <ChatPanel
-            messages={messages}
-            threads={branchView.threads || []}
-            changes={changes}
-            branchName={branchParam}
-            isStreaming={isStreaming}
-            contributionMode={mode === 'contribute'}
-            onStartContribution={handleStartContributing}
-            onScrollToChange={setFocusedChangeId}
-            onResolveThread={handleResolveThread}
-          />
+          {/* v0.5.0 — on main, the right panel is the PR-less discussion
+            * surface (threads.branch_name IS NULL). Branches keep their
+            * existing branch-chat panel; contribution still requires
+            * opening a PR from a branch via the Open PR affordance above. */}
+          {branchParam === 'main' ? (
+            <RFCDiscussionPanel slug={slug} viewer={viewer} />
+          ) : (
+            <ChatPanel
+              messages={messages}
+              threads={branchView.threads || []}
+              changes={changes}
+              branchName={branchParam}
+              isStreaming={isStreaming}
+              contributionMode={mode === 'contribute'}
+              onStartContribution={handleStartContributing}
+              onScrollToChange={setFocusedChangeId}
+              onResolveThread={handleResolveThread}
+            />
+          )}
           {mode === 'contribute' && (changes.length > 0 || manualPending) && (
             <ChangePanel
               changes={changes}