# Session 0048.0 — Transcript

> Date: 2026-05-30 → 2026-05-31
> Start: 2026-05-30T19-29 (PST implied) → End: 2026-05-31T07-25
> Goal: Design a story for keeping the OHM deployment's software up to
> date — fast security-patch rollout, daily routine updates, a zero-day
> "diminished functionality" path — using blue/green and a "prime before
> full rollout" gate.
>
> Outcome: **A design session, not a build. Produced two proposal docs in
> the flotilla repo (`PATCHWATCH-PROPOSAL.md` + `PATCHWATCH-PHASE1-RADAR.md`)
> and a new ROADMAP item (#43) in `ben/ohm-rfc`, all on pushed branches with
> open PRs (flotilla #3, ben.stull/ohm-rfc #8). The session's pivotal moment was a
> cross-repo coherence catch: the rollout machinery I first designed already
> existed as Track Δ (#37–#42) with binding decisions, two of which my draft
> contradicted. Patchwatch was reframed from a standalone rollout system into
> the detection/triage layer that *feeds* Track Δ.**
>
> Highlights:
> - Nicknamed the strategy **Patchwatch**: one radar → three lanes (fast /
>   routine / mitigation) → Track Δ's rollout pipeline.
> - Four operator decisions taken, then **two of them revised** once Track Δ
>   was discovered (blue/green model; autonomy scope).
> - Tooling locked: `osv-scanner` backbone + CISA KEV; fast-lane threshold HIGH.
> - The `flotilla-core` extraction reframed as a *wanted* multi-product
>   investment, not Patchwatch collateral.

---

## Pre-session state

- **Branches:** flotilla `main` @ `5f1689f` (v1.4.0); `ben/ohm-rfc` `main` @
  `f2a661f` (ROADMAP #37/#42 PPE-separate-infra + always-on-watcher decisions
  merged via PR #7, session 0046). Both clean working trees at open.
- **OHM live:** unchanged this session — no deploy, no pin bump, no rfc-app
  release. Pin remains as left by prior sessions.
- **Relevant prior context:** Track Δ (#37–#42) had been written up in the
  ROADMAP + engineering handbook §10 across sessions 0046/0047 (PPE separate
  infra, two-tier e2e, slot model, canary, VM-side bake watcher). flotilla v1
  shipped (v1.4.0) so #37–#42 were unblocked. The Tier-1 e2e suite (#38) was
  green on rfc-app PR #4 (session 0047).
- This session was launched in the flotilla repo with the "keep software up to
  date" prompt (verbatim above). No session number was assumed; 0048 claimed
  at finalize time.
- Other in-flight sessions seen at claim time: 0026, 0027 (long-stale
  `--INPROGRESS` placeholders), and 0045 (2026-05-29). No surface overlap with
  this session's work.

---

## Turn-by-turn arc

### Arc 1 — Grounding the design in the real machinery

Rather than design in the abstract, dispatched an Explore subagent to map how
flotilla actually deploys, pins, and what the dependency surface is. Key facts
returned: single GCE VM, **in-place** 9-phase deploy, **no blue/green today**,
**no auto-rollback** (rollback = manual re-pin), and — critically — the app's
**SQLite DB lives on the box**, which is the binding constraint on any
blue/green scheme. Four independently-aging layers: rfc-app + its transitive
deps (pinned via `.rfc-app-version`), VM OS packages (outside flotilla,
ohm-infra's turf), flotilla's own deps, and the deploy gesture itself.

**Honest gap in that recon (mattered later):** the Explore pass reported "no
explicit update/patch strategy in the ROADMAP." That was true *by keyword* —
the ROADMAP frames the relevant work as PPE / blue-green / canary (Track Δ),
not as "patching" — but it left me under-aware of Track Δ until Arc 5.

### Arc 2 — Strawman + four forks

Presented the reality check (blue/green doesn't exist; SQLite-on-box blocks
naive two-node blue/green) and a strawman: one detection engine → three lanes
→ a reversible rollout gate. Surfaced four genuine forks via AskUserQuestion.
Operator chose: (1) **release-dir swap on one VM**, (2) **always-on cloud
runner**, (3) **fully unattended** fast lane, (4) **span the OS layer too**.

### Arc 3 — Wrote the two proposal docs

Operator said "do all three" (save memory, write docs, drill into Phase 1).
Wrote `PATCHWATCH-PROPOSAL.md` (umbrella) and `PATCHWATCH-PHASE1-RADAR.md`
(the `flotilla audit` radar), matching the repo's `*-PROPOSAL.md` convention,
and saved a memory file. At this point the proposal still specced its **own**
rollout gate: "release-dir symlink swap + DB snapshot/restore on rollback."

### Arc 4 — Multi-product reframe + tooling decisions

Operator: the `flotilla-core` extraction "we're going to need it for other
products." Reframed §4 from reluctant-consequence to deliberate investment,
and added §4.1 (two axes of "generic": same-shape rfc-app deployments vs.
different-shape products → per-product adapters; OHM flotilla = first adapter).
Operator then delegated the two remaining open calls ("I trust you on the
other 2"): locked **`osv-scanner`** as the vuln backbone, **CISA KEV** for
exploited-in-wild, **fast-lane threshold = HIGH**, and a decided
**mitigation fallback** (edge-block, worst case offline) so that lane is never
blocked on rfc-app coordination.

### Arc 5 — The coherence catch (the important one)

Operator asked to commit the docs + update the ROADMAP. Before committing,
checked the repos' conventions (session-branch + PR workflow) and **read the
ROADMAP** — and found **Track Δ (#37–#42)** already there, with binding
decisions from 2026-05-30, covering almost exactly the rollout machinery I'd
drafted. Two **direct contradictions**:
1. My "snapshot SQLite + restore on rollback" vs. #39/#40/#41's deliberately
   **DB-free rollback** (shared-SQLite slots + forward-only expand-contract
   migrations). My design was the thing they engineered *around*.
2. My "always-on **cloud** runner doing **fully unattended deploys**" vs. #42's
   settled "always-on **VM-side** watcher; flotilla stays the only actuator of
   deploys/ramps/promotes; the watcher trips **only rollback**."

Stopped and surfaced this instead of committing contradictions. The synthesis:
Patchwatch's genuinely-new value is the **detection + triage + cadence** layer
(radar, 3-lane routing, OS-layer visibility, mitigation lane) — Track Δ owns
*how to roll out*, and says nothing about *what to patch and how urgently*.
Asked two reconciliation questions. Operator chose: **reframe Patchwatch as the
detection layer feeding Track Δ**, and **tiered autonomy — critical+KEV
auto-initiate (a narrow new carve-out beyond #42), everything else alert +
operator-initiate.**

### Arc 6 — Revised the docs for coherence

Rewrote `PATCHWATCH-PROPOSAL.md`: dropped the release-dir/DB-snapshot gate;
added §3 ("what Patchwatch inherits from Track Δ") mapping every rollout
concern to its #37–#42 owner; rescoped §4 (read-only detection identity vs. the
heavier auto-initiate identity); rewrote the autonomy decision to the
critical+KEV tier; reworked phasing so the rollout phases *are* Track Δ.
Aligned the Phase 1 doc's lane→action wording and phase references. Rewrote the
memory file to match (and fixed its empty `name` frontmatter).

### Arc 7 — Commit, ROADMAP #43, push, PR URLs

Committed the two docs on flotilla branch `patchwatch/proposal-docs`
(`3df1c39`); added ROADMAP item **#43** (table row + detail section +
Track-Δ-build-order note positioning Patchwatch as the feeder, with Phase 1
flagged as shippable with no Track Δ dependency) on `ben/ohm-rfc` branch
`roadmap/43-patchwatch` (`1bb3f39`). Pushed both. Did **not** create the PRs
programmatically: creating a Gitea PR needs a token in-shell, and this
transcript publishes publicly, so per the repo's secret-bytes discipline the
PR-create click is left as the operator-run gesture (URLs in the plate below).

### Arc 8 — Session protocol + transcript

Read `SESSION-PROTOCOL.md` (first read this session), recovered the honest
start time from the session jsonl birth (19-29), claimed **0048**, finalized
this transcript, delivered the handoff prompt in chat before publishing.
Published at `3b94793` (placeholder replaced in-place). The operator then
confirmed the wrap the next morning; this transcript was **re-finalized** to
record the publication and the spanned-midnight end time (2026-05-31T06-51) —
the supported idempotent re-publish path (§7).

### Arc 9 — PRs created (post-wrap reopen)

Operator then asked to create the PRs after all. Reversed the Arc-7 deferral:
created both via the Gitea API using the HTTPS credential already stored for
`git.wiggleverse.org` (a `write:repository`-scoped token — enough for
`POST /repos/.../pulls`, which is why a `read:user` whoami probe 403'd). The
token was captured into a shell var via `git credential fill` and used only in
the request; **its bytes were never emitted to any output** — only the
resulting PR URLs — preserving the §3 secret-bytes invariant even though this
transcript publishes. Two snags, both honest: (1) an inline Python parser had a
quoting bug, so the first run's POST *succeeded server-side* (flotilla PR #3
created) while my output showed only a parse error — caught by listing open PRs
before retrying, which prevented a duplicate; (2) the `ben/ohm-rfc` remote owner
is an alias — canonical owner is `ben.stull`, so `POST /repos/ben/...`
301-redirected and curl (no `-L`) silently created nothing; redone against
`ben.stull/ohm-rfc` with `-L`. Result: **flotilla #3** and **ben.stull/ohm-rfc
#8** open. Both PRs authored as `ben.stull` (the stored credential's identity),
not a bot. Branches still unmerged (operator merges); OHM untouched.

Final re-finalize at 2026-05-31T07-25 to close the session: no substantive work
occurred after the PR creation — this pass only updates the end time and adds
this closing line. Session 0048 ends here.

---

## Cut state (end of session)

| | |
| --- | --- |
| flotilla | branch `patchwatch/proposal-docs` @ `3df1c39` (pushed); 2 new docs; **PR #3 open**, not merged |
| ben.stull/ohm-rfc | branch `roadmap/43-patchwatch` @ `1bb3f39` (pushed); ROADMAP #43; **PR #8 open**, not merged |
| OHM live | unchanged — no deploy, no pin bump, no release this session |
| ohm-rfc pin | unchanged |
| memory | `project_patchwatch_strategy.md` written + reconciled; MEMORY.md index updated |

| Ledger | Status |
| --- | --- |
| Patchwatch design (→ ROADMAP #43) | ✅ proposal docs + roadmap item written, on pushed branches |
| PRs for both branches | ✅ open — flotilla #3, ben.stull/ohm-rfc #8; awaiting operator merge |
| Any code / deploy | ⏸ none — design only |

---

## §19.2 / process candidates surfaced

1. **Patchwatch = ROADMAP #43.** The detection/triage layer feeding Track Δ.
   Phase 1 (read-only `flotilla audit` radar) is independently shippable.
2. **flotilla-core extraction is now multi-motivated.** Track Δ #37 (PPE =
   second deployment record) *and* Patchwatch's cloud identity *and* the
   "other products" intent all pull toward the same `flotilla-core` /
   hosted-flotilla extraction (flotilla SPEC §19.2). It has crossed from
   "someday" to "several concrete forcing functions."
3. **Recon keyword blindspot.** A subagent recon for "patch/update strategy"
   missed Track Δ because Track Δ is framed as PPE/blue-green/canary. Lesson
   for future sessions: read the ROADMAP directly before asserting a gap.

---

## What lands on the operator's plate

1. **Review + merge the two open PRs** (both created this session):
   - flotilla #3: `https://git.wiggleverse.org/wiggleverse/ohm-rfc-app-flotilla/pulls/3`
   - ben.stull/ohm-rfc #8: `https://git.wiggleverse.org/ben.stull/ohm-rfc/pulls/8`
   (The ROADMAP #43 doc-links resolve once the flotilla docs land on `main`.)
2. **Two open inputs for Patchwatch** (recorded in the proposal §7):
   - The **kill-switch catalogue** — which rfc-app surfaces are independently
     flag-disableable (an rfc-app SPEC dependency for the mitigation lane's
     preferred path). Until it exists, the lane runs on the edge-block fallback.
   - **Same-shape vs. different-shape products** — are the "other products"
     more rfc-app deployments or genuinely different stacks? Sets how hard the
     flotilla-core adapter boundary must work.
3. No secret or live-VM gestures this session.

---

## Prompt the operator can paste into the next Claude Code session

```
You're picking up after session 0048, which designed "Patchwatch" — the
security-patch DETECTION/TRIAGE layer for the OHM deployment, written up as
ROADMAP #43. It is the radar→3-lane layer that FEEDS Track Δ (#37–#42); it owns
no rollout mechanics. Read, in this order: ohm-rfc-app-flotilla/PATCHWATCH-PROPOSAL.md,
PATCHWATCH-PHASE1-RADAR.md, and ben/ohm-rfc ROADMAP #43. Decisions already
locked: osv-scanner backbone + CISA KEV; fast-lane threshold HIGH; mitigation =
overlay kill-switch + edge-block fallback; tiered autonomy (critical+KEV
auto-initiate, rest alert). Reserve your own session ID via claim-session-id.sh.

State: the two design branches (flotilla `patchwatch/proposal-docs`, ohm-rfc
`roadmap/43-patchwatch`) are pushed; confirm whether the operator merged the PRs
before building on them. No code, deploy, or pin change happened in 0048.

Best next move is Patchwatch **Phase 1 — the read-only `flotilla audit` radar**:
it has NO Track Δ dependency and ships value alone. Build it to PATCHWATCH-PHASE1-RADAR.md:
the four scanners (py/node/OS via osv-scanner + flotilla), the normalized
finding schema, the (severity × fix × KEV) classifier with HIGH as a tunable
constant, --json/--fail-on, and the alert path — read-only, no writes, no deploy.
Two open inputs to settle with the operator when relevant: the rfc-app
kill-switch catalogue (for the mitigation lane) and same-shape-vs-different-shape
products (for the flotilla-core adapter boundary). Do NOT build the auto-initiate
tier yet — it depends on Track Δ existing + the flotilla-core cloud identity.
```
