Skip to content

Review Checklist

A review checklist is useful only if it catches the real ways this package can drift.

For bijux-proteomics-core, the first review question is whether the change belongs in durable contract space at all. Core gets expensive fast when nearby runtime or policy concerns leak inward.

Review Model

flowchart TB
    review["review proposed core change"]
    contract{"is this a durable core rule?"}
    alignment{"lifecycle, schema, and execution contract still agree?"}
    leakage{"runtime or intelligence concern leaking inward?"}
    approve["ready to approve"]

    review --> contract
    contract -->|yes| alignment
    contract -->|no| rehome["move to the owning package"]
    alignment -->|yes| leakage
    alignment -->|no| block1["keep reviewing"]
    leakage -->|no| approve
    leakage -->|yes| block2["keep reviewing"]

This is a boundary checklist before it is a style checklist. If the owning rule is ambiguous, every downstream package ends up compensating differently.

Review Rules

  • ask whether the change belongs in durable contract space
  • verify lifecycle, schema, and execution-contract surfaces still agree
  • check whether runtime or intelligence concerns are leaking inward

First Proof Check

  • packages/bijux-proteomics-core/tests
  • src/bijux_proteomics/program_spec.py and targets.py
  • src/bijux_proteomics/lifecycle.py and validation.py

Design Pressure

The failure here is approving a convenient local edit that turns one durable rule into several context-dependent interpretations.