Skip to content

Compatibility Commitments

Compatibility in bijux-canon-index should be explicit: stable commands, tracked schemas, durable artifacts, and release notes that explain intentional breakage.

This page should leave readers with a realistic sense of the compatibility bar. It is more valuable to be clear about what triggers review than to sound generously stable while leaving the real boundary ambiguous.

Treat the interfaces pages for bijux-canon-index as the bridge between implementation detail and caller expectation. They should show what the package is prepared to defend before a dependency forms.

Visual Summary

graph TD
    A[Compatibility Commitments] --> B[Declared compatibility window]
    B --> C[Allowed change types]
    C --> D[Breaking change gate]
    D --> E[Migration guidance]
    E --> F[Trustworthy interface evolution]

Compatibility Anchors

  • README.md
  • CHANGELOG.md
  • pyproject.toml

Review Rule

Breaking changes must be visible in code, docs, and validation together.

Concrete Anchors

  • CLI modules under src/bijux_canon_index/interfaces/cli
  • HTTP app under src/bijux_canon_index/api
  • OpenAPI schema files under apis/bijux-canon-index/v1
  • apis/bijux-canon-index/v1/schema.yaml

Use This Page When

  • you need the public command, API, import, schema, or artifact surface
  • you are checking whether a caller can safely rely on a given entrypoint or shape
  • you want the contract-facing side of the package before building on it

Decision Rule

Use Compatibility Commitments to decide whether a caller-facing surface is explicit enough to depend on. If the surface cannot be tied back to concrete code, schemas, artifacts, examples, and tests, treat it as unstable until that evidence is visible.

What This Page Answers

  • which public or operator-facing surfaces bijux-canon-index is really asking readers to trust
  • which schemas, artifacts, imports, or commands behave like contracts
  • what compatibility pressure a change to this surface would create

Reviewer Lens

  • compare commands, schemas, imports, and artifacts against the documented surface one by one
  • check whether a seemingly local change actually needs compatibility review
  • confirm that examples still point to real entrypoints and not to stale habits

Honesty Boundary

This page can identify the intended public surfaces of bijux-canon-index, but real compatibility depends on code, schemas, artifacts, examples, and tests staying aligned. If those disagree, the prose is wrong or incomplete.

Next Checks

  • move to operations when the caller-facing question becomes procedural or environmental
  • move to quality when compatibility or evidence of protection becomes the real issue
  • move back to architecture when a public-surface question reveals a deeper structural drift

Purpose

This page describes what should trigger compatibility review for the package.

Stability

Keep it aligned with the package's actual public surfaces and release process.