Review-to-Evolution Policy
policy · created
Evidence record
- What is verified
- Uses in published workflows: 0
- Revision
- Version 0.1.0
- Validation status
- Public-sanitized publication; no independent validation is claimed.
What this is and why
Every customer remark becomes a GitHub issue in the public trace repository, and every issue triggers an artifact-evolution step: closing the defect is not closing the issue. Each finding is classified as exactly one of absent, inadequate or mis-scoped, and the classification determines the response — author the missing artifact, revise the weak one with a revision note naming the defect, or narrow the applicability of one that describes a different situation and cover the real case. The policy exists because a defect is evidence about the shape of the knowledge, not only about the code: three consecutive reviews produced fixes that left the artifact untouched, and the same class of defect returned under a different selector.
Where it was applied and what it helped deliver
No published workflow records this capability yet — the count includes only ledger mentions that resolve.
Relations
- Uses: constrains
- evidence-bearing-verification
- Uses: part-of
- honesty-presentation
- Uses: uses
- knowledge-evolution
- Uses: validated-by
- design-system
Metadata and provenance
- id
- tal-policy-review-to-evolution
- type
- policy
- version
- 0.1.0
- origin
- created in Talomnia
- lifecycle
- public_sanitized
- tags
- process, evolution, review, governance, tz-14-8
The source is the private knowledge repository; only the sanitized public projection reaches this site.
verified · tal-policy-review-to-evolution · v0.1.0