Address T2 review asks from Karpathy (request_changes) + Jobs
(approve with minor asks) without touching published commits:
- scripts/codemod/README.md (new): records remove-appdatabase-passthrough.mjs
usage, the completeness proof for METHOD_TO_MODULE (typecheck-clean +
524 tests green at 118e3d8 = no orphaned call sites), and the sequential
revert recipe for C1 (3 -> 2 -> 1, not independent because 118e3d8
bundled vault simplification).
- CONTRIBUTING.md (new): pass-through ban + codemod usage + sequential
revert recipe + file-size ceiling + C6 wave cap. Whitelisted in
.gitignore alongside the existing doc exceptions.
- docs/proposals/C6.2-error-taxonomy-phase2.md: wave 2 scope boundary
names renderer-adjacent / api-server / browser / automation / skills
explicitly and excludes src/main/database/** + src/main/worker/runtime/**
(B2 / M10 high-churn zones). Wave 2 and wave 3 each capped at 30
catch sites so C6 cannot expand without bound.
- src/main/agent-runtime/artifact-projector.ts, runtime-bridge.ts:
N-scan TODOs now carry a death date ("TODO(M-followup by 2026-05-20)").
If the date passes without decomposition, a follow-up session MUST
revisit or justify the exception.
Karpathy T2 asks #1 and #2 (split part 3 / "independent revert" language)
are addressed in CONTRIBUTING + codemod README as documentation, not
history rewrites, because 118e3d8 is already published.
Typecheck clean. No structural code changes; pure docs + comment edits.
- backup.ts: log.warn when `git rev-parse HEAD` fails so sandbox/CI runs
with no git show diagnosably instead of silently emitting gitSha:null
(Karpathy review ask).
- backup.ts: expand comment on VACUUM INTO to pin the WAL-mode invariant
— future readers must not "helpfully" add a wal_checkpoint call
(Karpathy review ask).
- C6.2 proposal: add hard coordination gate before wave 3 because
commit 0db6e42 already demonstrated the race hazard when two agents
touch scripts/ / connector-definitions/ in the same window
(Linus review ask).
Partitions the remaining catch sites into three waves (worker +
orchestration, IPC surfaces, database + credentials) so each wave is
one coherent review and can land in parallel with the B2 migration
precondition work that depends on classified DB catches.
Non-goals are explicit: no observable behaviour change, no renderer-
side coverage, no Result<T, AppError> envelope. The proposal exists
so the error taxonomy reaches the 95%+ coverage a lint rule needs.
ZacharyZhang-NY