# Session 0083.0 — Transcript

> App: ohm
> Start: 2026-06-06T01-49 (PST)
> End: 2026-06-06T02-17 (PST)
> Type: coding
> Mode: autonomous (yolo)
> Driver: Ben Stull (+ Claude Opus 4.8)

## Launch prompt

```
Finish §22 S6 remainder: request-to-join + cross-collection inbox (§22.8), then
per-type surfaces (§22.4a items 1&3). Build by analogy to shipped §28
contribution_requests + S4 memberships.grant.
```

## Outcome

The §22 S6 remainder is complete; the deployment→project→collection three-tier
model is now realized in both code and `SPEC.md`. Two landings:

1. **§22.8 request-to-join + the cross-collection inbox — shipped v0.46.0**
   (PR #24, `origin/main` = `1c17fec`).
2. **Per-type surfaces (§22.4a items 1 & 3) — spec pass done** (PR #25,
   `origin/main` = `b7e23a0`), the discovery/spec pass the goal called for,
   leaving implementation to slices S7a–S7c.

## Pre-state

- `origin/main` = `0140150` (S6 core, v0.45.0): the SPEC merge, per-collection
  `enabled_models` (mig 031), the type-driven entry noun (§22.4a item 2).
- Two S6 items were deferred at v0.45.0 as "wanting a discovery/spec pass first":
  the per-type surfaces (§22.4a items 1 & 3) and request-to-join (§22.8).
- Clean tree on `main`, fully pushed. Three other ohm sessions (0079/0080/0081)
  in flight (unfinalized placeholders) — noted, proceeded concurrently per the
  autonomous default. (A concurrent session's `e86fc65 Discovery spec:
  configurable collection metadata` landed on `main` mid-session; merges stayed
  clean.)

## The arc

**1. Understand (read the spec + the analogues).** Read `SPEC.md` §22.8 / §22.11
(request-to-join surfaces to "the scope's Owners across the subtree", accepting
writes the `memberships` row; one deployment-wide inbox) and the design doc Part
E S6 framing. Mapped the two analogues: §28 `contribution_requests`
(`api_contributions.py`, migration 024, the per-owner notification fan-out +
accept/decline lifecycle) and S4 `memberships` (`api_memberships.py` /
`memberships.py` — `grant` + the broader-scope-supersedes prune, the
`can_invite_at_{project,collection}` gates). Confirmed the engine seam: a join
request targets a `(scope_type, scope_id)` pair (the `memberships` vocabulary
minus `global`), and accept grants a scope role instead of minting an RFC invite.

**2. §22.8 implementation (backend).**
- Migration `032_join_requests.sql` — additive table (no rebuild), `scope_type ∈
  {project, collection}`, `requested_role`/`granted_role`/`status` enums, a
  one-open-per-`(scope, requester)` partial unique index.
- `auth.effective_role_at_scope(user, scope_type, scope_id)` — the scope-grain
  twin of `effective_scope_role` (which only keys on a collection), folding
  global→project for a project target. Drives the dup-member gate + the
  `can_request_join` flag.
- `notify`: `_scope_owner_user_ids` (upward Owner enumeration = the
  cross-collection inbox), `fan_out_join_request`, `notify_join_decided`, three
  `render_summary` cases.
- `api_join_requests.py` — `GET join-target` / `POST join-requests` / `POST
  {id}/accept` / `{id}/decline` under `/api/scopes/{scope_type}/{scope_id}/`.
  Key decision: the request POST does **not** require the scope be readable —
  that is precisely how one joins a *gated* scope they were told about (§22.8).
  Registered the router in `api.py`.

**3. §22.8 implementation (frontend).** `api.js` join verbs; `JoinRequestModal`;
the `viewer.can_request_join` flag added to the project + collection viewer
blocks in `api_collections.py`; a "Request to join" affordance in
`CollectionDirectory` (project scope) and the `Catalog` footer (collection
scope); the actionable `JoinRequestRow` in `Inbox.jsx` (the cross-collection
inbox surface, which is automatic once the fan-out reaches the right Owners).

**4. Tests + release.** `test_join_requests_vertical.py` (11: cross-collection
fan-out, project vs collection reach, accept-writes-membership, role-narrowing,
decline, dup-409, existing-member-409, non-owner-403, sibling-collection-403,
unknown-scope-404, eligibility) + `test_migration_032_join_requests.py` (5).
Frontend `api.joinrequests.test.js` (4) + two `CollectionDirectory` cases.
**Backend 546 / frontend 36 green; frontend build clean.** Bumped VERSION +
`package.json` → 0.46.0, CHANGELOG 0.46.0 entry ("no upgrade steps" — additive).
Branch `feat/s6-join-requests` → Gitea-API PR #24 → merged → `main`.

**5. Per-type surfaces — the spec pass.** The goal flagged these as wanting a
discovery/spec pass first (no BDD scenarios existed in Part C, which is
role-focused). Grounded in the current type plumbing (`registry.VALID_TYPES`,
the lenient type-agnostic `entry.py`) and wrote
`docs/design/2026-06-06-per-type-surfaces.md`: Part A (item 1 — the per-type
frontmatter schema via a new `entry_schema.py` validator), Part B (item 3 — the
`specification` Releases view + the `bdd` scenario/coverage views), Part C (BDD
acceptance scenarios `@S7a/@S7b/@S7c`), Part D (a 3-slice additive,
engine-preserving delivery plan + open product questions). Added a
forward-pointer + shipped/spec'd status to the three-tier doc's S6 bullet.
Branch `spec/s7-per-type-surfaces` → Gitea-API PR #25 → merged → `main`.

## Cut state

- `origin/main` = `b7e23a0`; local `main` clean and synced; no open PRs; both
  feature branches deleted on merge.
- VERSION 0.46.0 (mirrored in `frontend/package.json`).
- Backend 546 / frontend 36 green; frontend build clean.

## Deferred decisions

Low-confidence / autonomous calls made without operator input:

- **Request POST is not readability-gated.** Deliberate per §22.8 ("a user who
  knows a *gated* scope exists requests to join it") — you cannot require read on
  a scope that is invisible to the requester. Guarded instead by signed-in +
  granted + not-already-a-member + dup-pending. Alternative considered: require
  readability (would make gated joins impossible via the API). Confident.
- **`join_requests.scope_type` excludes `global`.** A deployment isn't a thing
  one "discovers and joins" (§22.8 names a project/collection). Confident.
- **Route shape `/api/scopes/{scope_type}/{scope_id}/…`.** Clean and mirrors the
  `memberships` scope vocabulary; §17 is illustrative and doesn't pin the
  contribution/membership routes, so no SPEC change. Reasonable.
- **Accept may narrow the requested role** (optional `role` body, default =
  requested). Gives the Owner control rather than forcing the asked-for role;
  within the Owner's grant reach. Minor.
- **Treated the per-type surfaces as a *spec-doc* deliverable, not code.** The
  goal said they "want a discovery/spec pass first"; I produced the spec pass
  (design doc + BDD scenarios + slicing) and left implementation to S7a–S7c
  rather than coding surfaces that still carry open product questions. This is
  the call most worth the operator's eye — if the intent was "implement them
  too," S7a (schemas) is unblocked and ready; S7b/S7c need the D.1 questions
  settled first (a discovery session may fit).

## Next session

```
/goal implement S7a — per-type frontmatter schema (§22.4a item 1), per docs/design/2026-06-06-per-type-surfaces.md Part A + Part C @S7a: a backend/app/entry_schema.py validator, the new optional Entry fields (specification: spec_version/lifecycle/supersedes; bdd: feature/verifies), write-boundary enforcement on propose/edit/PR-merge, and the §7 catalog "malformed frontmatter" flag — additive, non-breaking, document/N=1 unchanged.
```

S7b (specification releases) + S7c (bdd surfaces) follow once their Part D.1 open
questions (release identity vs `spec_version` pinning; `verifies` ref grammar /
anchors; whether `lifecycle` enters the state machine) are settled — possibly a
discovery session.