Skip to content

Scope and Non-Goals

bijux-canon-dev is for maintainers and automation.

Its value depends on discipline. If maintainer code starts absorbing product behavior, the repository loses one of its most important boundaries: the difference between health tooling and product surface.

These maintainer pages should read like explicit operational memory for repository-health work. They are strongest when they expose automation intent, package impact, and repository policy without pretending that CI logs are documentation.

Visual Summary

flowchart RL
    page["Scope and Non-Goals<br/>clarifies: explain automation | see repository-health scope | review package impact"]
    classDef page fill:#dbeafe,stroke:#1d4ed8,color:#1e3a8a,stroke-width:2px;
    classDef positive fill:#dcfce7,stroke:#16a34a,color:#14532d;
    classDef caution fill:#fee2e2,stroke:#dc2626,color:#7f1d1d;
    classDef anchor fill:#ede9fe,stroke:#7c3aed,color:#4c1d95;
    classDef action fill:#fef3c7,stroke:#d97706,color:#7c2d12;
    detail1["release support"]
    detail1 --> page
    detail2["schema integrity"]
    detail2 --> page
    detail3["supply-chain visibility"]
    detail3 --> page
    detail4["package-aware automation"]
    detail4 --> page
    detail5["release clarity"]
    detail5 --> page
    detail6["package consistency"]
    detail6 --> page
    detail7["less CI archaeology"]
    detail7 --> page
    detail8["quality gates"]
    detail8 --> page
    detail9["security gates"]
    detail9 --> page
    next1["open the relevant helper module or test after using this page to orient yourself"]
    page --> next1
    next2["return to repository handbook pages when the maintainer issue turns out to be root policy instead"]
    page --> next2
    next3["move to product package docs if the question is user-facing behavior rather than repository health"]
    page --> next3
    class page page;
    class detail1,detail2,detail3,detail4,detail5,detail6,detail7,detail8,detail9 anchor;
    class next1,next2,next3 action;

In Scope

  • CI-facing helpers
  • quality, security, SBOM, release, and schema checks
  • package-specific repository automation

Out of Scope

  • user-facing runtime behavior
  • product-domain models that belong to canonical packages
  • legacy-name compatibility shims

Concrete Anchors

  • packages/bijux-canon-dev/src/bijux_canon_dev for maintainer helpers
  • packages/bijux-canon-dev/tests for executable maintenance proof
  • apis/ and root workflows for repository-level integration points

Use This Page When

  • you are changing repository automation, validation, or release support
  • you need maintainer-only context that should not live in product package docs
  • you are reviewing CI, schema drift, or supply-chain behavior

Decision Rule

Use Scope and Non-Goals to decide whether a change belongs to maintainer automation or to a product package contract. If the change would affect end-user behavior directly, this page should push the review back toward the owning product package instead of letting maintainer scope sprawl.

What This Page Answers

  • which repository maintenance concern this page explains
  • which maintainer modules or tests support that concern
  • what a reviewer should confirm before changing repository automation

Reviewer Lens

  • compare the described maintainer behavior with the actual helper modules and tests
  • check that maintainer-only guidance has not leaked into product-facing pages
  • confirm that repository automation still names its package impact explicitly

Next Checks

  • move to product package docs if the question is user-facing behavior rather than repository health
  • open the relevant helper module or test after using this page to orient yourself
  • return to repository handbook pages when the maintainer issue turns out to be root policy instead

Honesty Boundary

This section can describe maintainer automation and repository health work, but it should never imply that maintainer tooling is part of the end-user product surface. It also should not pretend that hidden scripts count as documentation just because CI happens to run them.

Purpose

This page prevents maintenance code from becoming an unbounded dumping ground.

Stability

Update this page only when ownership truly moves into or out of the maintenance package.