|
|
|
@@ -1,741 +0,0 @@
|
|
|
|
|
# MASTER IMPLEMENTATION PROMPT
|
|
|
|
|
## Building a Modern Git Platform with CI/CD + GitOps + Operational UX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are an elite senior staff engineer, platform architect, DevOps architect, distributed systems engineer, and product UX engineer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are tasked with designing and implementing a next-generation self-hosted Git platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This platform exists in the category of:
|
|
|
|
|
- GitHub
|
|
|
|
|
- GitLab
|
|
|
|
|
- Forgejo
|
|
|
|
|
- Gitea
|
|
|
|
|
- Bitbucket
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BUT:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You must NOT merely clone existing platforms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The goal is to create:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> a modern developer operations platform
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that deeply integrates:
|
|
|
|
|
- Git hosting
|
|
|
|
|
- pull requests
|
|
|
|
|
- CI/CD
|
|
|
|
|
- GitOps
|
|
|
|
|
- deployments
|
|
|
|
|
- environments
|
|
|
|
|
- observability
|
|
|
|
|
- security
|
|
|
|
|
- operational awareness
|
|
|
|
|
- developer productivity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform should feel:
|
|
|
|
|
- fast
|
|
|
|
|
- operational
|
|
|
|
|
- developer-first
|
|
|
|
|
- low cognitive load
|
|
|
|
|
- modern
|
|
|
|
|
- reliable
|
|
|
|
|
- modular
|
|
|
|
|
- keyboard-first
|
|
|
|
|
- context-aware
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The product philosophy is:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> repositories are operational systems
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOT:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> collections of files.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
HIGH LEVEL PRODUCT GOALS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform should optimize for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- immediate situational awareness
|
|
|
|
|
- workflow continuity
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment visibility
|
|
|
|
|
- operational clarity
|
|
|
|
|
- reliability
|
|
|
|
|
- developer flow
|
|
|
|
|
- observability
|
|
|
|
|
- intelligent automation
|
|
|
|
|
- security by default
|
|
|
|
|
- excellent UX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Users should always be able to answer:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- what changed?
|
|
|
|
|
- what failed?
|
|
|
|
|
- what deployed?
|
|
|
|
|
- what is unhealthy?
|
|
|
|
|
- what needs my attention?
|
|
|
|
|
- what environments are affected?
|
|
|
|
|
- what should I review next?
|
|
|
|
|
- what caused this incident?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
without navigating deeply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
CORE PRODUCT PRINCIPLES
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. UX FIRST
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most Git platforms prioritize functionality over usability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This platform must prioritize:
|
|
|
|
|
- readability
|
|
|
|
|
- discoverability
|
|
|
|
|
- contextual awareness
|
|
|
|
|
- progressive disclosure
|
|
|
|
|
- speed
|
|
|
|
|
- low noise
|
|
|
|
|
- operational understanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
|
- tab overload
|
|
|
|
|
- enterprise clutter
|
|
|
|
|
- giant forms
|
|
|
|
|
- notification spam
|
|
|
|
|
- YAML-centric UX
|
|
|
|
|
- log-centric UX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The system should feel:
|
|
|
|
|
- intentional
|
|
|
|
|
- calm
|
|
|
|
|
- efficient
|
|
|
|
|
- operationally intelligent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. OPERATIONAL AWARENESS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform must continuously surface:
|
|
|
|
|
- failing pipelines
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment health
|
|
|
|
|
- environment drift
|
|
|
|
|
- flaky tests
|
|
|
|
|
- security issues
|
|
|
|
|
- review bottlenecks
|
|
|
|
|
- dependency risks
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment risks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This information should appear naturally throughout the UI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. REPOSITORIES ARE RUNTIME SYSTEMS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The repository page should not simply display files.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It should display:
|
|
|
|
|
- deployments
|
|
|
|
|
- environments
|
|
|
|
|
- active PRs
|
|
|
|
|
- operational health
|
|
|
|
|
- timelines
|
|
|
|
|
- incidents
|
|
|
|
|
- ownership
|
|
|
|
|
- risk
|
|
|
|
|
- observability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The file tree is secondary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. GITOPS IS FIRST CLASS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Git should become:
|
|
|
|
|
- source of truth
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment history
|
|
|
|
|
- environment state definition
|
|
|
|
|
- rollback system
|
|
|
|
|
- audit log
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The system must support:
|
|
|
|
|
- reconciliation
|
|
|
|
|
- drift detection
|
|
|
|
|
- declarative environments
|
|
|
|
|
- promotion workflows
|
|
|
|
|
- rollback visualization
|
|
|
|
|
- environment topology
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. RELIABILITY IS A PRIMARY FEATURE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform should optimize for:
|
|
|
|
|
- deterministic execution
|
|
|
|
|
- idempotency
|
|
|
|
|
- isolation
|
|
|
|
|
- resilience
|
|
|
|
|
- queue durability
|
|
|
|
|
- observability
|
|
|
|
|
- safe rollbacks
|
|
|
|
|
- fault tolerance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
ARCHITECTURE REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Design the platform using modular services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suggested architecture:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
Platform
|
|
|
|
|
├── API Gateway
|
|
|
|
|
├── Auth Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Repository Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Pull Request Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Issue Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Event Bus
|
|
|
|
|
├── CI Orchestrator
|
|
|
|
|
├── Runner Manager
|
|
|
|
|
├── Artifact Registry
|
|
|
|
|
├── Package Registry
|
|
|
|
|
├── Deployment Engine
|
|
|
|
|
├── GitOps Controller
|
|
|
|
|
├── Environment Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Secret Manager
|
|
|
|
|
├── Notification Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Search Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Observability Layer
|
|
|
|
|
├── Metrics Service
|
|
|
|
|
├── Audit Service
|
|
|
|
|
└── Web Frontend
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
EVENT DRIVEN ARCHITECTURE
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform should be event-driven.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everything emits events.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
repo.created
|
|
|
|
|
push.created
|
|
|
|
|
pr.opened
|
|
|
|
|
review.requested
|
|
|
|
|
pipeline.started
|
|
|
|
|
pipeline.failed
|
|
|
|
|
artifact.published
|
|
|
|
|
deployment.started
|
|
|
|
|
deployment.failed
|
|
|
|
|
environment.drift_detected
|
|
|
|
|
incident.created
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Requirements:
|
|
|
|
|
- durable events
|
|
|
|
|
- replay support
|
|
|
|
|
- auditability
|
|
|
|
|
- timeline reconstruction
|
|
|
|
|
- reactive UI updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommended technologies:
|
|
|
|
|
- NATS
|
|
|
|
|
- Kafka
|
|
|
|
|
- RabbitMQ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prefer NATS initially for simplicity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
CI/CD SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The CI/CD system must support:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- DAG pipelines
|
|
|
|
|
- matrix builds
|
|
|
|
|
- reusable workflows
|
|
|
|
|
- workflow templates
|
|
|
|
|
- conditional execution
|
|
|
|
|
- parallel execution
|
|
|
|
|
- artifacts
|
|
|
|
|
- caches
|
|
|
|
|
- retries
|
|
|
|
|
- concurrency controls
|
|
|
|
|
- cancellation
|
|
|
|
|
- pipeline graphs
|
|
|
|
|
- environment promotion
|
|
|
|
|
- rollback support
|
|
|
|
|
- preview environments
|
|
|
|
|
- flaky test detection
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment visualization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The orchestrator should:
|
|
|
|
|
- schedule
|
|
|
|
|
- coordinate
|
|
|
|
|
- monitor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOT directly execute jobs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
RUNNER SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Runners should:
|
|
|
|
|
- be ephemeral
|
|
|
|
|
- isolated
|
|
|
|
|
- disposable
|
|
|
|
|
- reproducible
|
|
|
|
|
- stateless
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support execution backends:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Docker containers
|
|
|
|
|
2. Kubernetes jobs
|
|
|
|
|
3. Firecracker microVMs
|
|
|
|
|
4. Bare metal runners
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security is critical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forked PRs must never automatically receive secrets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
SECRET MANAGEMENT
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement scoped secret management.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secret hierarchy:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
Global
|
|
|
|
|
→ Organization
|
|
|
|
|
→ Repository
|
|
|
|
|
→ Environment
|
|
|
|
|
→ Runtime ephemeral injection
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support:
|
|
|
|
|
- Vault
|
|
|
|
|
- OIDC federation
|
|
|
|
|
- cloud secret providers
|
|
|
|
|
- encrypted secret storage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secrets must:
|
|
|
|
|
- never leak to logs
|
|
|
|
|
- be masked automatically
|
|
|
|
|
- support audit trails
|
|
|
|
|
- support rotation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
ARTIFACT + PACKAGE MANAGEMENT
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement:
|
|
|
|
|
- build artifact storage
|
|
|
|
|
- OCI registry
|
|
|
|
|
- package registries
|
|
|
|
|
- retention policies
|
|
|
|
|
- artifact provenance
|
|
|
|
|
- signing support
|
|
|
|
|
- SBOM support
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support:
|
|
|
|
|
- container images
|
|
|
|
|
- npm
|
|
|
|
|
- cargo
|
|
|
|
|
- pip
|
|
|
|
|
- maven
|
|
|
|
|
- generic artifacts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
GITOPS REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GitOps must be deeply integrated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support:
|
|
|
|
|
- reconciliation loops
|
|
|
|
|
- drift detection
|
|
|
|
|
- sync visualization
|
|
|
|
|
- environment topology
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment promotion
|
|
|
|
|
- rollback flows
|
|
|
|
|
- canary releases
|
|
|
|
|
- blue/green deployments
|
|
|
|
|
- environment history
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The UI should make GitOps understandable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avoid overwhelming Kubernetes-centric UX.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
DATABASE + STORAGE DESIGN
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Separate:
|
|
|
|
|
- application code
|
|
|
|
|
- repository storage
|
|
|
|
|
- artifacts
|
|
|
|
|
- caches
|
|
|
|
|
- logs
|
|
|
|
|
- uploads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repository storage should NOT exist in the app repository.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
/data/repos
|
|
|
|
|
/data/artifacts
|
|
|
|
|
/data/cache
|
|
|
|
|
/data/uploads
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repository storage is runtime instance data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treat it like:
|
|
|
|
|
- database files
|
|
|
|
|
- object storage
|
|
|
|
|
- runtime state
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
DASHBOARD REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The dashboard should behave like:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> an operational command center
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOT:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> a repository list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Attention Required
|
|
|
|
|
- failing pipelines
|
|
|
|
|
- stale PRs
|
|
|
|
|
- security alerts
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment failures
|
|
|
|
|
- environment drift
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Active Workspaces
|
|
|
|
|
- active repos
|
|
|
|
|
- active branches
|
|
|
|
|
- assigned reviews
|
|
|
|
|
- recent deployments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Team Activity
|
|
|
|
|
- merges
|
|
|
|
|
- releases
|
|
|
|
|
- deployments
|
|
|
|
|
- incidents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. CI/CD Overview
|
|
|
|
|
- pipeline health
|
|
|
|
|
- queue health
|
|
|
|
|
- flaky tests
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment status
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. Review Dashboard
|
|
|
|
|
- pending reviews
|
|
|
|
|
- high risk PRs
|
|
|
|
|
- stale reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. Security Overview
|
|
|
|
|
- dependency vulnerabilities
|
|
|
|
|
- secret leaks
|
|
|
|
|
- suspicious pushes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
REPOSITORY PAGE REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The repository page must feel operational.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top area should include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
Repo Name
|
|
|
|
|
Production: Healthy
|
|
|
|
|
CI: Passing
|
|
|
|
|
Deployments: 3 active
|
|
|
|
|
Risk: Medium
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The page should include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- active PRs
|
|
|
|
|
- deployments
|
|
|
|
|
- environments
|
|
|
|
|
- repository health
|
|
|
|
|
- security alerts
|
|
|
|
|
- ownership
|
|
|
|
|
- recent activity
|
|
|
|
|
- operational timeline
|
|
|
|
|
- preview environments
|
|
|
|
|
- CI/CD overview
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment history
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The README should not dominate the page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
UNIFIED OPERATIONAL TIMELINE
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement a unified timeline merging:
|
|
|
|
|
- commits
|
|
|
|
|
- deployments
|
|
|
|
|
- incidents
|
|
|
|
|
- rollbacks
|
|
|
|
|
- CI failures
|
|
|
|
|
- security events
|
|
|
|
|
- alerts
|
|
|
|
|
- releases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is one of the most important features.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Users should easily answer:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> what changed before things broke?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
PIPELINE UX REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pipelines should be visual DAGs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support:
|
|
|
|
|
- dependency visualization
|
|
|
|
|
- execution timing
|
|
|
|
|
- bottleneck detection
|
|
|
|
|
- retry controls
|
|
|
|
|
- artifact visibility
|
|
|
|
|
- live execution state
|
|
|
|
|
- grouped logs
|
|
|
|
|
- semantic errors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logs should support:
|
|
|
|
|
- filtering
|
|
|
|
|
- collapsing
|
|
|
|
|
- syntax highlighting
|
|
|
|
|
- structured parsing
|
|
|
|
|
- AI summarization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
DEPLOYMENT UX REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deployments must feel first-class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each environment should expose:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
Production
|
|
|
|
|
Healthy
|
|
|
|
|
v1.4.2
|
|
|
|
|
3 pods
|
|
|
|
|
0.1% errors
|
|
|
|
|
Last deploy 14m ago
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support:
|
|
|
|
|
- rollback
|
|
|
|
|
- traffic shifting
|
|
|
|
|
- canary visibility
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment timelines
|
|
|
|
|
- release notes
|
|
|
|
|
- environment logs
|
|
|
|
|
- health checks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
COMMAND PALETTE REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement a global command palette.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inspired by:
|
|
|
|
|
- VS Code
|
|
|
|
|
- Raycast
|
|
|
|
|
- Linear
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
/retry failed jobs
|
|
|
|
|
/deploy staging
|
|
|
|
|
/open logs
|
|
|
|
|
/review next
|
|
|
|
|
/show flaky tests
|
|
|
|
|
/open production incidents
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keyboard-first navigation is critical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
AI-ASSISTED FEATURES
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement optional AI-assisted operational tooling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- failure diagnosis
|
|
|
|
|
- flaky test detection
|
|
|
|
|
- architecture summaries
|
|
|
|
|
- impact analysis
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment risk scoring
|
|
|
|
|
- review summaries
|
|
|
|
|
- onboarding explanations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Example:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
|
|
|
Likely failure cause:
|
|
|
|
|
Database migration introduced lock contention.
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
OBSERVABILITY REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integrate:
|
|
|
|
|
- metrics
|
|
|
|
|
- traces
|
|
|
|
|
- logs
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment state
|
|
|
|
|
- incident state
|
|
|
|
|
- service topology
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do not isolate observability into external systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expose operational health directly in repository pages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement:
|
|
|
|
|
- durable queues
|
|
|
|
|
- retries
|
|
|
|
|
- dead-letter queues
|
|
|
|
|
- resumable pipelines
|
|
|
|
|
- distributed scheduling
|
|
|
|
|
- concurrency controls
|
|
|
|
|
- checkpointing
|
|
|
|
|
- idempotent operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform should survive:
|
|
|
|
|
- runner crashes
|
|
|
|
|
- orchestrator crashes
|
|
|
|
|
- network partitions
|
|
|
|
|
- deployment interruptions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement:
|
|
|
|
|
- signed artifacts
|
|
|
|
|
- provenance verification
|
|
|
|
|
- branch protections
|
|
|
|
|
- permission scopes
|
|
|
|
|
- audit logging
|
|
|
|
|
- secret scanning
|
|
|
|
|
- dependency scanning
|
|
|
|
|
- runner isolation
|
|
|
|
|
- sandboxing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support:
|
|
|
|
|
- Sigstore
|
|
|
|
|
- Cosign
|
|
|
|
|
- SLSA concepts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
UI/UX DESIGN LANGUAGE
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The UI should feel:
|
|
|
|
|
- modern
|
|
|
|
|
- minimal
|
|
|
|
|
- operational
|
|
|
|
|
- clean
|
|
|
|
|
- responsive
|
|
|
|
|
- keyboard-first
|
|
|
|
|
- information dense but calm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Visual inspirations:
|
|
|
|
|
- Linear
|
|
|
|
|
- Datadog
|
|
|
|
|
- Grafana
|
|
|
|
|
- Raycast
|
|
|
|
|
- Arc Browser
|
|
|
|
|
- VS Code
|
|
|
|
|
- modern observability dashboards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avoid:
|
|
|
|
|
- clutter
|
|
|
|
|
- giant tables
|
|
|
|
|
- excessive modal workflows
|
|
|
|
|
- deeply nested navigation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
IMPLEMENTATION EXPECTATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You should:
|
|
|
|
|
- think deeply about architecture
|
|
|
|
|
- optimize for maintainability
|
|
|
|
|
- optimize for extensibility
|
|
|
|
|
- prioritize UX heavily
|
|
|
|
|
- prioritize reliability heavily
|
|
|
|
|
- explain tradeoffs
|
|
|
|
|
- avoid overengineering early
|
|
|
|
|
- support future scalability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You should continuously ask:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- does this reduce cognitive load?
|
|
|
|
|
- does this improve operational awareness?
|
|
|
|
|
- does this improve developer flow?
|
|
|
|
|
- does this improve reliability?
|
|
|
|
|
- does this make debugging easier?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
DELIVERABLES
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When implementing features:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provide:
|
|
|
|
|
- architecture reasoning
|
|
|
|
|
- schema design
|
|
|
|
|
- API design
|
|
|
|
|
- event definitions
|
|
|
|
|
- service boundaries
|
|
|
|
|
- UI mockups
|
|
|
|
|
- workflow diagrams
|
|
|
|
|
- UX rationale
|
|
|
|
|
- security implications
|
|
|
|
|
- scaling considerations
|
|
|
|
|
- operational implications
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Always optimize for:
|
|
|
|
|
- clarity
|
|
|
|
|
- reliability
|
|
|
|
|
- developer experience
|
|
|
|
|
- operational intelligence
|
|
|
|
|
- future extensibility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform should ultimately feel like:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> a unified operating system for software delivery
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rather than:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> a Git repository viewer with CI attached.
|