Skip to content

Module 10: Migration, Governance, and DVC Boundaries

Page Maps

graph LR
  family["Reproducible Research"]
  program["Deep Dive DVC"]
  section["Migration Governance Dvc Boundaries"]
  page["Module 10: Migration, Governance, and DVC Boundaries"]
  capstone["Capstone evidence"]

  family --> program --> section --> page
  page -.applies in.-> capstone
flowchart LR
  orient["Orient on the page map"] --> read["Read the main claim and examples"]
  read --> inspect["Inspect the related code, proof, or capstone surface"]
  inspect --> verify["Run or review the verification path"]
  verify --> apply["Apply the idea back to the module and capstone"]

Module 10 turns the course into a stewardship method.

The earlier modules teach individual contracts: data identity, environment evidence, truthful pipelines, meaningful metrics, controlled experiments, collaboration, recovery, and promotion. The final module asks whether you can review a real repository and make deliberate changes without breaking those contracts.

This module is about mature judgment:

  • how to review a DVC repository without wishful thinking
  • how to migrate one state boundary safely
  • how to write lightweight governance that people can follow
  • how to identify recurring DVC anti-patterns before they become culture
  • how to decide what DVC should own and what belongs to another layer

The central question is:

Which state contracts are broken, underspecified, or assigned to the wrong tool?

If that answer stays vague, future improvements will become accidental rewrites.

The capstone corroboration surface for this module is the full project review route: capstone/dvc.yaml, capstone/dvc.lock, capstone/params.yaml, capstone/publish/v1/, capstone/docs/architecture.md, capstone/docs/review-route-guide.md, capstone/docs/recovery-guide.md, and the make -C capstone confirm route.

Why this module exists

The last skill is not another command.

It is being able to say:

  • this state boundary is clear
  • this one is fragile
  • this migration plan preserves recovery
  • this governance rule is worth enforcing
  • this shortcut will become an anti-pattern
  • this problem is not DVC's job

That judgment is what lets a repository improve without losing trust.

Study route

flowchart LR
  overview["Overview"] --> core1["Core 1: repository review"]
  core1 --> core2["Core 2: migration safety"]
  core2 --> core3["Core 3: governance rules"]
  core3 --> core4["Core 4: anti-pattern review"]
  core4 --> core5["Core 5: DVC boundaries"]
  core5 --> example["Worked example"]
  example --> practice["Exercises and answers"]
  practice --> glossary["Glossary"]

Read the module in that order the first time.

If the problem is already partly clear, use this shortcut:

  • open Core 1 when the main confusion is "how do I review a repository honestly?"
  • open Core 2 when the main confusion is "how do I move a state boundary safely?"
  • open Core 3 when the main confusion is "which rules should stay after the course ends?"
  • open Core 4 when the main confusion is "which shortcuts should I reject early?"
  • open Core 5 when the main confusion is "what should DVC own, and what should another system own?"

Module map

Page Purpose
Overview explains the module promise and study route
Repository Review without Wishful Thinking teaches an evidence-first review method
Safe Migration Plans for State Boundaries teaches migration planning that preserves trust
Governance Rules for Long-Lived Repositories teaches small durable rules for future changes
Anti-Patterns and Review Interventions teaches recurring DVC shortcuts and how to stop them
DVC Tool Boundaries and System Ownership teaches where DVC should and should not be authoritative
Worked Example: Reviewing a DVC Repository for Stewardship walks through one final repository review
Exercises gives five mastery exercises
Exercise Answers explains model answers and review logic
Glossary keeps the module vocabulary stable

What should be clear by the end

By the end of this module, you should be able to explain:

  • how to review a DVC repository by evidence, not optimism
  • how to plan one safe migration without breaking recovery or auditability
  • how governance differs from process clutter
  • how anti-patterns emerge from reasonable shortcuts
  • when DVC is the right authority and when another layer should own the concern
  • how to leave a repository with a concrete stewardship recommendation

Commands to keep close

These commands form the evidence loop for Module 10:

make -C capstone confirm
make -C capstone release-audit
make -C capstone recovery-review
dvc status
dvc repro -n

Use the make routes for the course-provided capstone review. Use the DVC commands to inspect whether proposed changes preserve the state contracts the repository already claims.

Capstone route

Use the capstone as a review specimen.

Best corroboration surfaces for this module:

  • capstone/dvc.yaml
  • capstone/dvc.lock
  • capstone/params.yaml
  • capstone/publish/v1/
  • capstone/docs/architecture.md
  • capstone/docs/review-route-guide.md
  • capstone/docs/recovery-guide.md
  • capstone/Makefile

Useful proof route:

make -C capstone confirm
make -C capstone recovery-review
make -C capstone release-audit

The point of that route is not to admire the capstone. It is to practice the final course skill: reviewing state contracts, proposing safe changes, and knowing where DVC's authority ends.