Bijux Canon¶
bijux-canon is a package system for deterministic ingest, retrieval,
reasoning, orchestration, and governed execution. Open this site to find the
package that owns the behavior under review and the repository rules that keep
the package handoffs explicit.
The split is the design. Each package owns one operational promise strongly enough that you can follow the full system as a chain of accountable handoffs instead of treating the repository as one blurred codebase.
One concrete reading path makes that split easier to trust. A source document
is prepared by bijux-canon-ingest, turned into replayable retrieval behavior
by bijux-canon-index, translated into inspectable claims by
bijux-canon-reason, coordinated by bijux-canon-agent, and accepted or
replayed under bijux-canon-runtime. The root owns the rules that keep those
handoffs visible. It does not own the package behavior itself.
System Shape
Five canonical packages carry the product flow, the root explains shared coordination, the maintainer handbook explains repository health, and compatibility docs exist only to bridge old names.
Integrity Rule
Statements here must stay consistent with checked-in code, schemas, tests, release assets, and published package boundaries.
Fast Route
Open the repository handbook for cross-package seams, a product handbook for owned behavior, the maintainer handbook for automation, and compatibility docs only when a legacy package name is still in play.
What It Takes And Produces¶
- takes: governed documents, retrieval corpora, execution manifests, and policy contracts
- produces: ingest artifacts, vector execution outputs, reasoning bundles, agent traces, and replayable runtime records
- guarantees: explicit package ownership, checked-in API schemas, deterministic or bounded execution modes, and reviewable release surfaces
- does not do: promise model correctness, hide cross-package coupling behind one import, or treat one successful run as sufficient evidence
System Map¶
flowchart LR
source["source material"]
ingest["ingest"]
index["index"]
reason["reason"]
agent["agent"]
runtime["runtime"]
accepted["accepted run"]
repository["repository handbook"]
maintain["maintenance handbook"]
compat["compatibility handbook"]
source --> ingest --> index --> reason --> agent --> runtime --> accepted
repository --> ingest
repository --> index
repository --> reason
repository --> agent
repository --> runtime
maintain --> repository
compat --> ingest
compat --> index
compat --> reason
compat --> agent
compat --> runtime
Read the homepage like a chain of ownership. The product story moves left to right through the five canonical packages. The repository handbook explains the shared boundary rules around that chain. The maintenance handbook proves how the repository enforces those rules. The compatibility handbook exists only to route old names back to their canonical owners.
Start Here¶
- open the Repository Handbook when the question crosses package boundaries or touches shared root rules
- open one product handbook when the behavior already belongs to ingest, index, reason, agent, or runtime
- open the Maintenance Handbook for automation, Make routing, CI contracts, and repository health
- open the Compatibility Handbook only when an older distribution, import, or command name is still in play
One Real Run¶
A useful mental model is a reviewable run. Each layer changes the question that the next layer is allowed to ask. Ingest asks whether source material is stable enough to hand forward. Index asks whether retrieval happened through an auditable contract. Reason asks what the retrieved evidence supports. Agent asks how the work should be coordinated. Runtime asks whether the full run can be accepted, persisted, and replayed.
sequenceDiagram
autonumber
participant Reader
participant Ingest
participant Index
participant Reason
participant Agent
participant Runtime
Reader->>Ingest: provide source material
Ingest-->>Index: deterministic chunks and preparation records
Index-->>Reason: retrieved evidence with provenance and replay data
Reason-->>Agent: claims, checks, and reasoning artifacts
Agent-->>Runtime: ordered workflow trace and final package outputs
Runtime-->>Reader: accepted, rejected, or replayable run verdict
Package Handbooks¶
| Package | Owns | Open It When |
|---|---|---|
bijux-canon-ingest |
document preparation, chunking, and ingest-facing boundaries | you need to understand how raw inputs become deterministic material |
bijux-canon-index |
vector execution, backend integration, and provenance-rich retrieval results | you are reviewing search or retrieval behavior rather than document preparation |
bijux-canon-reason |
evidence-aware reasoning, claims, and verification | you need to inspect how evidence becomes explainable conclusions |
bijux-canon-agent |
role-based orchestration and trace-backed agent workflows | you are reviewing how multi-step agent work is coordinated and explained |
bijux-canon-runtime |
governed execution, replay, persistence, and final acceptability | you need the authority layer that decides whether a run is acceptable and durable |
Shared Handbooks¶
- Repository Handbook explains the root-owned design boundary, shared workflow, and package seams
- Maintainer Handbook documents helper code, Make surfaces, and workflow contracts that keep the repository healthy
- Compatibility Handbook documents preserved legacy names and the migration pressure away from them
Proof Surfaces¶
mkdocs.ymlfor the published navigation sourcepackages/for the package split this page is introducingdocs/for the handbook entry pages that route readers into the repositorypackages/bijux-canon-dev/src/bijux_canon_dev/docs/repository_docs_catalog.pyfor the catalog tooling behind the handbook structure
Start with packages/ if the main question is package ownership. Start with
mkdocs.yml if the main question is documentation routing. Start with
Makefile, makes/, or .github/workflows/ if the claim is about shared
verification or release behavior. If none of those surfaces can support the
claim quickly, the homepage should be treated as orientation rather than proof.
Leave This Page When¶
- one package or shared handbook clearly owns the question
- the next step is a concrete interface, workflow, schema, test, or release surface
- the issue is known to be maintainer-only or legacy-only