shoney.arickathil
a798cf6698
- developer directive: pending iteration IDs now ARE the priority order; LANDED iterations keep historical numbers (code comments and commit history cite them — records, not a queue); 8/11 (the half-landed arc), 17 (parked, artifacts on a branch), 18 (next, artifacts named) also frozen - mapping (recorded in 00-story): 19<-20 Float+Bytes, 20<-9c attach, 21<-9d keypair, 22<-9e benchmarks, 23<-9f io_uring WAL, 24<-19 chat, 25<-10 services, 26<-12 blue-green, 27<-9g query corpus, 28<-14 skillhost, 29<-13 metaprogramming - 11 story files renamed; every doc reference re-numbered (word-boundary sweep for the lettered 9x ids, phrase-level for numeric ones); the iterations table rewritten with Seq == priority and "(was N)" notes; story-scoped link check: zero broken - merge-recovery folded in: the partial master merge had dropped the chat story, the fibers exploration note, the arc spec+plan, the framework-v2 plan, and the iteration-17 spec+plan — all restored from their branches and renumbered consistently Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| main.wo | ||
| README.md | ||
| wo.toml | ||
employee-list — program B: attach, authenticate, read
Status: target workload — does not compile on today's toolchain. Written ahead of iterations 20 (cross-program tables) and 21 (keypair attach auth), the way every acceptance sample here precedes its features. It also leans on 9/9b (the employee sample it attaches to must run first).
Two programs, one database, one writer:
employee (A) employee-list (B)
owns WO_DATA + WAL no database of its own
[share] listen = unix:...sock [connect.employee] ipc = unix:...sock
[[share.clients]] public_key = <A's fingerprint, pinned>
public_key = <B's fingerprint> project = ../employee (shapes)
rights = "read"
▲ │
└── every statement executes here ◄───┘ (typed, over the wire)
The manifests are the design: A grants, B pins. A's [share] names B's
public-key fingerprint with rights (read here); B's [connect.employee]
names A's IPC string AND A's fingerprint, so neither side talks to an
impostor. Fingerprints are printed by each program's --identity after
first boot (keys are generated into WO_DATA, never written into a toml)
and pasted — the PASTE-…-HERE placeholders mark exactly where. The
connect-section name is the code's namespace: [connect.employee] is why
the source says employee.Employee.
| Mode | What it proves |
|---|---|
employee-list list |
typed reads over the wire, e.dept.name ref navigation executing inside A |
employee-list report |
byte-identical output to A's own report — attach + GroupBy compose, the wire changes nothing |
employee-list staff <dept> |
unique-name index probe + staff backlink scan, both in A |
employee-list probe-write |
the rights matrix: registered read-only, so the insert traps with access-denied (caught, DENIED …, exit 4) and A's row count is unchanged |
The 21 acceptance drives the rest from the outside: wrong key, no key, same-uid-wrong-key, impostor socket, handshake replay, key rotation — see the iteration's criteria; this sample is the workload they run against.