Prepare ConfigKit v0.4.2 release

AGENTS.md

@@ -1,5 +1,25 @@
-Please review `docs/development.md` for initial orientation in this repository
-and follow its task-specific reading guide.
+<!-- codebase-memory-mcp:start -->
+# Codebase Knowledge Graph (codebase-memory-mcp)
 
-Review and follow `docs/policy/agents.md` before recommending, planning, or
-implementing any changes to this repository.
+This project uses codebase-memory-mcp to maintain a knowledge graph of the codebase.
+ALWAYS prefer MCP graph tools over grep/glob/file-search for code discovery.
+
+## Priority Order
+1. `search_graph` — find functions, classes, routes, variables by pattern
+2. `trace_path` — trace who calls a function or what it calls
+3. `get_code_snippet` — read specific function/class source code
+4. `query_graph` — run Cypher queries for complex patterns
+5. `get_architecture` — high-level project summary
+
+## When to fall back to grep/glob
+- Searching for string literals, error messages, config values
+- Searching non-code files (Dockerfiles, shell scripts, configs)
+- When MCP tools return insufficient results
+<!-- codebase-memory-mcp:end -->
+
+Start with `docs/development.md` for orientation and use its policy reading guide
+to select the policies applicable to the task. Do not read the entire suite by
+default.
+
+Read and follow `docs/policy/agents.md` before recommending, planning, or
+implementing repository changes.

COPYRIGHT

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+ConfigKit
+
+Copyright (C) 2026 Eric Rakestraw
+
+SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-3.0-or-later
+
+This library is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it
+under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published by
+the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
+(at your option) any later version.
+
+The GNU Lesser General Public License version 3 and its incorporated
+GNU General Public License version 3 text are provided in LICENSE.
+
+This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+GNU Lesser General Public License for more details.
+
+Third-party code and assets are subject to their respective license terms.
+
+Policy documents adapted from Standard Repository Policies, the root AGENTS.md
+orientation, and the Policy Reading Guide in docs/development.md remain licensed
+under CC-BY-SA-4.0. See docs/oss/attribution.md for the affected material,
+upstream credit, and license links.

README.md

@@ -40,3 +40,7 @@ The [deferred scope](docs/roadmap/deferred.md) records deliberate exclusions. Se
 [development guide](docs/development.md) for repository orientation and the
 [release procedure](docs/release.md) for maintainer-only candidate and publication
 steps.
+
+ConfigKit code is licensed under the [LGPL v3.0 or later](COPYRIGHT).
+
+[Open Source attribution notices](docs/oss/attribution.md) are available.

docs/development.md

@@ -8,22 +8,43 @@ public behavior.
 ## Initial orientation
 
 1. Inspect the working tree and preserve unrelated changes.
-   Agents must read and follow the [agent policy](policy/agents.md) before
-   recommending, planning, or implementing changes.
-2. Read the architecture policy for code or design work.
-3. Read the policy, contract, and internal documents applicable to the task.
+2. Use the Policy Reading Guide below to select applicable policies.
+3. Read the contract and internal documents applicable to the task.
 4. Inspect the relevant implementation and behavioral tests before changing them.
 
+## Policy Reading Guide
+
+| Policy | Read before… |
+| --- | --- |
+| [Policy set provenance](policy/meta.md) | Adopting policies, checking upstream revisions, or updating the adopted policy set. |
+| [Agents](policy/agents.md) | Recommending, planning, or implementing repository changes. |
+| [Architecture](policy/architecture.md) | Planning or changing Go library code or its structure. |
+| [Testing](policy/testing.md) | Selecting validation for code changes, or adding, changing, removing, or evaluating tests. |
+| [Documentation](policy/documentation.md) | Writing, revising, or reorganizing documentation. |
+| [OSS](policy/oss.md) | Adding or updating dependencies or incorporated third-party material, or changing licensing or attribution. |
+| [Release](policy/release.md) | Preparing or publishing a release, changing release procedures, or making versioning and compatibility decisions. |
+
+- Read applicable policies before making decisions they govern; multiple policies
+  may apply.
+- Select policies using the task triggers above. Follow cross-references to
+  relevant sections when needed to resolve a concrete question.
+- Reuse policies already available in context; reread when changed or no longer
+  available.
+- Expand reading when the task's scope expands.
+- When revising a policy itself, read that policy and any provisions elsewhere
+  affected by the revision.
+
 ## Task-specific reading guide
 
 | Task | Read |
 | --- | --- |
-| Repository orientation or component responsibility | [Architecture policy](policy/architecture.md) and [component overview](internal/overview.md) |
-| Documentation changes | [Documentation policy](policy/documentation.md) and the owning document |
-| Architecture decisions or future work | [Documentation policy](policy/documentation.md), [deferred scope](roadmap/deferred.md), and relevant ADRs listed below |
-| Code and test changes | [Architecture policy](policy/architecture.md), [testing policy](policy/testing.md), and the owning contract and tests from the map below |
+| Repository orientation or component responsibility | [Component overview](internal/overview.md) |
+| Documentation changes | The owning document |
+| Licensing, dependencies, attribution, or release-document changes | [Project grant](../COPYRIGHT) and [attribution](oss/attribution.md); release changes also follow the release procedure |
+| Architecture decisions or future work | [Deferred scope](roadmap/deferred.md) and relevant ADRs listed below |
+| Code and test changes | The owning contract and tests from the map below |
 | Examples or copyable assets | The owning implemented contract and [consumer adoption guide](consumers/README.md) |
-| Release preparation | [Release policy](policy/release.md) and [release procedure](release.md) |
+| Release preparation | [Release procedure](release.md) |
 
 Accepted decisions:
 
@@ -43,7 +64,8 @@ git show cb5b435:docs/roadmap/remediation.md
 ```
 
 Release-candidate, publication, and verification work follows the operational
-[release procedure](release.md).
+[release procedure](release.md). Its single publication command validates the
+committed candidate and publishes only the intended refs.
 
 The completed string-and-integer schema-version implementation and remediation
 records are preserved in Git history at `244104f`. The
@@ -95,8 +117,9 @@ Use focused checks while iterating, with validation proportionate to the change
 under the testing policy. Documentation-only work normally needs the local-link
 check below and whitespace review; behavior-bearing examples and commands also
 need execution. Use `go test -race ./...` for ownership or concurrency changes.
-The [release checker](release.md#4-validate-the-source-candidate) performs one
-minimum-toolchain race-suite run, vet, module hygiene, and Linux cross-builds.
+The [publication command](release.md#4-publish-the-committed-candidate) invokes
+the release checker once. It performs one minimum-toolchain offline race-suite
+run, one full vet pass, and Linux cross-builds using readonly module mode.
 It already covers examples, links, and package boundaries; do not additionally
 run the everyday checker just to repeat those checks. CI never gates a release.
 
@@ -117,7 +140,8 @@ code changes. Use the component overview to find the corresponding implementatio
 | Secrets, bootstrap, redaction, explanation | [References](../internal/engine/secret_reference_test.go), [bootstrap](../internal/engine/secrets_test.go), [rendering](../internal/engine/render_test.go), [explanation](../internal/engine/explain_test.go) | `go test ./internal/engine -run 'Secret\|Bootstrap\|Effective\|Explain\|Explanation\|History\|Sensitivity'` |
 | Consumer examples and migration fixtures | [Consumer tests](../examples/consumers/consumers_test.go), [API examples](../example_test.go) | `go test ./examples/consumers` and `go test . -run '^Example'` |
 | Documentation links and dependency isolation | [Link checks](../documentation_test.go), [import boundary](../import_boundary_test.go), [public boundary](../public_boundary_test.go) | `go test . -run 'TestLocalDocumentationLinks\|TestDependencyImportBoundary\|TestPublicFacadeBoundary'` |
-| Check-command behavior | [Shell regression](../release_check_test.go) | `go test . -run '^TestCheckScripts'` |
+| Development and release checker behavior | [Shell regression](../release_check_test.go) | `go test . -run 'TestCheckScripts\|TestDevelopmentCheck'` |
+| Guarded release publication and recovery | [Publication regression](../release_publish_test.go) | `go test . -run '^TestReleasePublication'` |
 
 ## Fuzz validation
 

docs/oss/attribution.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# Open Source Attribution Notices
+
+## Standard Repository Policies
+
+Material: `docs/policy/meta.md`, `docs/policy/oss.md`,
+`docs/policy/documentation.md`, `docs/policy/agents.md`,
+`docs/policy/architecture.md`, `docs/policy/testing.md`, and
+`docs/policy/release.md`; root `AGENTS.md`; and the Policy Reading Guide in
+`docs/development.md`, adapted for this repository.
+
+Copyright (C) 2026 Eric Rakestraw
+
+SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0
+
+License and notices: [CC BY-SA 4.0](licenses/CC-BY-SA-4.0.txt) |
+[COPYRIGHT](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/COPYRIGHT) |
+[LICENSE](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/LICENSE).
+
+[Source](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843).
+
+## go-yaml v4
+
+Selected module: `go.yaml.in/yaml/v4` at `v4.0.0-rc.6`.
+
+Copyright 2011-2019 Canonical Ltd
+
+Copyright 2025 The go-yaml Project Contributors
+
+Copyright 2006-2010 Kirill Simonov
+
+SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 AND MIT
+
+License and notices: [Apache 2.0](licenses/Apache-2.0.txt) |
+[MIT](licenses/MIT.txt) |
+[NOTICE](https://github.com/yaml/go-yaml/blob/1c17b9cee72bf81ae73a8be50fbd7dd3a9985125/NOTICE) |
+[LICENSE](https://github.com/yaml/go-yaml/blob/1c17b9cee72bf81ae73a8be50fbd7dd3a9985125/LICENSE).
+
+[Source](https://github.com/yaml/go-yaml/tree/1c17b9cee72bf81ae73a8be50fbd7dd3a9985125).

docs/oss/licenses/Apache-2.0.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,202 @@
+
+                                 Apache License
+                           Version 2.0, January 2004
+                        http://www.apache.org/licenses/
+
+   TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
+
+   1. Definitions.
+
+      "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
+      and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.
+
+      "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
+      the copyright owner that is granting the License.
+
+      "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
+      other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
+      control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
+      "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
+      direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
+      otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
+      outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
+
+      "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
+      exercising permissions granted by this License.
+
+      "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
+      including but not limited to software source code, documentation
+      source, and configuration files.
+
+      "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
+      transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
+      not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
+      and conversions to other media types.
+
+      "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
+      Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
+      copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
+      (an example is provided in the Appendix below).
+
+      "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
+      form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
+      editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
+      represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
+      of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
+      separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
+      the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
+
+      "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
+      the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
+      to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
+      submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner
+      or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
+      the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
+      means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
+      to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
+      communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
+      and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
+      Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
+      excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
+      designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution."
+
+      "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
+      on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
+      subsequently incorporated within the Work.
+
+   2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
+      publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
+      Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
+
+   3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
+      use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
+      where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
+      by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
+      Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
+      with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
+      institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
+      cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
+      or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
+      or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
+      granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
+      as of the date such litigation is filed.
+
+   4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
+      Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
+      modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
+      meet the following conditions:
+
+      (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
+          Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
+
+      (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
+          stating that You changed the files; and
+
+      (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
+          that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
+          attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
+          excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
+          the Derivative Works; and
+
+      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
+          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
+          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
+          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
+          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
+          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
+          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
+          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
+          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
+          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
+          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
+          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
+          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
+          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
+          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
+          as modifying the License.
+
+      You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
+      may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
+      for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
+      for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
+      reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
+      the conditions stated in this License.
+
+   5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
+      any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
+      by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
+      this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
+      Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
+      the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
+      with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
+
+   6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
+      names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
+      except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
+      origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
+
+   7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
+      agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
+      Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+      WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
+      implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
+      of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
+      PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
+      appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
+      risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.
+
+   8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
+      whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
+      unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
+      negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
+      liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
+      incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
+      result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
+      Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
+      work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
+      other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
+      has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
+
+   9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
+      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
+      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
+      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
+      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
+      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
+      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
+      defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
+      incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
+      of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
+
+   END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+
+   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
+
+      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
+      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
+      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
+      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
+      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
+      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
+      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
+      identification within third-party archives.
+
+   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
+
+   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+   You may obtain a copy of the License at
+
+       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+
+   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+   limitations under the License.

docs/oss/licenses/CC-BY-SA-4.0.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
+Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
+
+ Creative Commons Corporation (“Creative Commons”) is not a law firm and does not provide legal services or legal advice. Distribution of Creative Commons public licenses does not create a lawyer-client or other relationship. Creative Commons makes its licenses and related information available on an “as-is” basis. Creative Commons gives no warranties regarding its licenses, any material licensed under their terms and conditions, or any related information. Creative Commons disclaims all liability for damages resulting from their use to the fullest extent possible.
+
+Using Creative Commons Public Licenses
+
+Creative Commons public licenses provide a standard set of terms and conditions that creators and other rights holders may use to share original works of authorship and other material subject to copyright and certain other rights specified in the public license below. The following considerations are for informational purposes only, are not exhaustive, and do not form part of our licenses.
+
+Considerations for licensors: Our public licenses are intended for use by those authorized to give the public permission to use material in ways otherwise restricted by copyright and certain other rights. Our licenses are irrevocable. Licensors should read and understand the terms and conditions of the license they choose before applying it. Licensors should also secure all rights necessary before applying our licenses so that the public can reuse the material as expected. Licensors should clearly mark any material not subject to the license. This includes other CC-licensed material, or material used under an exception or limitation to copyright. More considerations for licensors.
+
+Considerations for the public: By using one of our public licenses, a licensor grants the public permission to use the licensed material under specified terms and conditions. If the licensor’s permission is not necessary for any reason–for example, because of any applicable exception or limitation to copyright–then that use is not regulated by the license. Our licenses grant only permissions under copyright and certain other rights that a licensor has authority to grant. Use of the licensed material may still be restricted for other reasons, including because others have copyright or other rights in the material. A licensor may make special requests, such as asking that all changes be marked or described.
+
+Although not required by our licenses, you are encouraged to respect those requests where reasonable. More considerations for the public.
+
+Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License
+
+By exercising the Licensed Rights (defined below), You accept and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License ("Public License"). To the extent this Public License may be interpreted as a contract, You are granted the Licensed Rights in consideration of Your acceptance of these terms and conditions, and the Licensor grants You such rights in consideration of benefits the Licensor receives from making the Licensed Material available under these terms and conditions.
+
+Section 1 – Definitions.
+
+     a.	Adapted Material means material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights that is derived from or based upon the Licensed Material and in which the Licensed Material is translated, altered, arranged, transformed, or otherwise modified in a manner requiring permission under the Copyright and Similar Rights held by the Licensor. For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image.
+
+     b.	Adapter's License means the license You apply to Your Copyright and Similar Rights in Your contributions to Adapted Material in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Public License.
+
+     c.	BY-SA Compatible License means a license listed at creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses, approved by Creative Commons as essentially the equivalent of this Public License.
+
+     d.	Copyright and Similar Rights means copyright and/or similar rights closely related to copyright including, without limitation, performance, broadcast, sound recording, and Sui Generis Database Rights, without regard to how the rights are labeled or categorized. For purposes of this Public License, the rights specified in Section 2(b)(1)-(2) are not Copyright and Similar Rights.
+
+     e.	Effective Technological Measures means those measures that, in the absence of proper authority, may not be circumvented under laws fulfilling obligations under Article 11 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty adopted on December 20, 1996, and/or similar international agreements.
+
+     f.	Exceptions and Limitations means fair use, fair dealing, and/or any other exception or limitation to Copyright and Similar Rights that applies to Your use of the Licensed Material.
+
+     g.	License Elements means the license attributes listed in the name of a Creative Commons Public License. The License Elements of this Public License are Attribution and ShareAlike.
+
+     h.	Licensed Material means the artistic or literary work, database, or other material to which the Licensor applied this Public License.
+
+     i.	Licensed Rights means the rights granted to You subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, which are limited to all Copyright and Similar Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material and that the Licensor has authority to license.
+
+     j.	Licensor means the individual(s) or entity(ies) granting rights under this Public License.
+
+     k.	Share means to provide material to the public by any means or process that requires permission under the Licensed Rights, such as reproduction, public display, public performance, distribution, dissemination, communication, or importation, and to make material available to the public including in ways that members of the public may access the material from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.
+
+     l.	Sui Generis Database Rights means rights other than copyright resulting from Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, as amended and/or succeeded, as well as other essentially equivalent rights anywhere in the world.
+
+     m.	You means the individual or entity exercising the Licensed Rights under this Public License. Your has a corresponding meaning.
+
+Section 2 – Scope.
+
+     a.	License grant.
+
+          1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, the Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, irrevocable license to exercise the Licensed Rights in the Licensed Material to:
+
+               A. reproduce and Share the Licensed Material, in whole or in part; and
+
+               B. produce, reproduce, and Share Adapted Material.
+
+          2. Exceptions and Limitations. For the avoidance of doubt, where Exceptions and Limitations apply to Your use, this Public License does not apply, and You do not need to comply with its terms and conditions.
+
+          3. Term. The term of this Public License is specified in Section 6(a).
+
+          4. Media and formats; technical modifications allowed. The Licensor authorizes You to exercise the Licensed Rights in all media and formats whether now known or hereafter created, and to make technical modifications necessary to do so. The Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any right or authority to forbid You from making technical modifications necessary to exercise the Licensed Rights, including technical modifications necessary to circumvent Effective Technological Measures. For purposes of this Public License, simply making modifications authorized by this Section 2(a)(4) never produces Adapted Material.
+
+          5. Downstream recipients.
+
+               A. Offer from the Licensor – Licensed Material. Every recipient of the Licensed Material automatically receives an offer from the Licensor to exercise the Licensed Rights under the terms and conditions of this Public License.
+
+               B. Additional offer from the Licensor – Adapted Material. Every recipient of Adapted Material from You automatically receives an offer from the Licensor to exercise the Licensed Rights in the Adapted Material under the conditions of the Adapter’s License You apply.
+
+               C. No downstream restrictions. You may not offer or impose any additional or different terms or conditions on, or apply any Effective Technological Measures to, the Licensed Material if doing so restricts exercise of the Licensed Rights by any recipient of the Licensed Material.
+
+          6. No endorsement. Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be construed as permission to assert or imply that You are, or that Your use of the Licensed Material is, connected with, or sponsored, endorsed, or granted official status by, the Licensor or others designated to receive attribution as provided in Section 3(a)(1)(A)(i).
+
+     b.	Other rights.
+
+          1. Moral rights, such as the right of integrity, are not licensed under this Public License, nor are publicity, privacy, and/or other similar personality rights; however, to the extent possible, the Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any such rights held by the Licensor to the limited extent necessary to allow You to exercise the Licensed Rights, but not otherwise.
+
+          2. Patent and trademark rights are not licensed under this Public License.
+
+          3. To the extent possible, the Licensor waives any right to collect royalties from You for the exercise of the Licensed Rights, whether directly or through a collecting society under any voluntary or waivable statutory or compulsory licensing scheme. In all other cases the Licensor expressly reserves any right to collect such royalties.
+
+Section 3 – License Conditions.
+
+Your exercise of the Licensed Rights is expressly made subject to the following conditions.
+
+     a.	Attribution.
+
+          1. If You Share the Licensed Material (including in modified form), You must:
+
+               A. retain the following if it is supplied by the Licensor with the Licensed Material:
+
+                    i.	identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if designated);
+
+                    ii.	a copyright notice;
+
+                    iii. a notice that refers to this Public License;
+
+                    iv.	a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties;
+
+                    v.	a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable;
+
+               B. indicate if You modified the Licensed Material and retain an indication of any previous modifications; and
+
+               C. indicate the Licensed Material is licensed under this Public License, and include the text of, or the URI or hyperlink to, this Public License.
+
+          2. You may satisfy the conditions in Section 3(a)(1) in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in which You Share the Licensed Material. For example, it may be reasonable to satisfy the conditions by providing a URI or hyperlink to a resource that includes the required information.
+
+          3. If requested by the Licensor, You must remove any of the information required by Section 3(a)(1)(A) to the extent reasonably practicable.
+
+     b.	ShareAlike.In addition to the conditions in Section 3(a), if You Share Adapted Material You produce, the following conditions also apply.
+
+          1. The Adapter’s License You apply must be a Creative Commons license with the same License Elements, this version or later, or a BY-SA Compatible License.
+
+          2. You must include the text of, or the URI or hyperlink to, the Adapter's License You apply. You may satisfy this condition in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in which You Share Adapted Material.
+
+          3. You may not offer or impose any additional or different terms or conditions on, or apply any Effective Technological Measures to, Adapted Material that restrict exercise of the rights granted under the Adapter's License You apply.
+
+Section 4 – Sui Generis Database Rights.
+
+Where the Licensed Rights include Sui Generis Database Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material:
+
+     a.	for the avoidance of doubt, Section 2(a)(1) grants You the right to extract, reuse, reproduce, and Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database;
+
+     b.	if You include all or a substantial portion of the database contents in a database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights, then the database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights (but not its individual contents) is Adapted Material, including for purposes of Section 3(b); and
+
+     c.	You must comply with the conditions in Section 3(a) if You Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database.
+For the avoidance of doubt, this Section 4 supplements and does not replace Your obligations under this Public License where the Licensed Rights include other Copyright and Similar Rights.
+
+Section 5 – Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liability.
+
+     a.	Unless otherwise separately undertaken by the Licensor, to the extent possible, the Licensor offers the Licensed Material as-is and as-available, and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Licensed Material, whether express, implied, statutory, or other. This includes, without limitation, warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement, absence of latent or other defects, accuracy, or the presence or absence of errors, whether or not known or discoverable. Where disclaimers of warranties are not allowed in full or in part, this disclaimer may not apply to You.
+
+     b.	To the extent possible, in no event will the Licensor be liable to You on any legal theory (including, without limitation, negligence) or otherwise for any direct, special, indirect, incidental, consequential, punitive, exemplary, or other losses, costs, expenses, or damages arising out of this Public License or use of the Licensed Material, even if the Licensor has been advised of the possibility of such losses, costs, expenses, or damages. Where a limitation of liability is not allowed in full or in part, this limitation may not apply to You.
+
+     c.	The disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liability provided above shall be interpreted in a manner that, to the extent possible, most closely approximates an absolute disclaimer and waiver of all liability.
+
+Section 6 – Term and Termination.
+
+     a.	This Public License applies for the term of the Copyright and Similar Rights licensed here. However, if You fail to comply with this Public License, then Your rights under this Public License terminate automatically.
+
+     b.	Where Your right to use the Licensed Material has terminated under Section 6(a), it reinstates:
+
+          1. automatically as of the date the violation is cured, provided it is cured within 30 days of Your discovery of the violation; or
+
+          2. upon express reinstatement by the Licensor.
+
+     c.	For the avoidance of doubt, this Section 6(b) does not affect any right the Licensor may have to seek remedies for Your violations of this Public License.
+
+     d.	For the avoidance of doubt, the Licensor may also offer the Licensed Material under separate terms or conditions or stop distributing the Licensed Material at any time; however, doing so will not terminate this Public License.
+
+     e.	Sections 1, 5, 6, 7, and 8 survive termination of this Public License.
+
+Section 7 – Other Terms and Conditions.
+
+     a.	The Licensor shall not be bound by any additional or different terms or conditions communicated by You unless expressly agreed.
+
+     b.	Any arrangements, understandings, or agreements regarding the Licensed Material not stated herein are separate from and independent of the terms and conditions of this Public License.
+
+Section 8 – Interpretation.
+
+     a.	For the avoidance of doubt, this Public License does not, and shall not be interpreted to, reduce, limit, restrict, or impose conditions on any use of the Licensed Material that could lawfully be made without permission under this Public License.
+
+     b.	To the extent possible, if any provision of this Public License is deemed unenforceable, it shall be automatically reformed to the minimum extent necessary to make it enforceable. If the provision cannot be reformed, it shall be severed from this Public License without affecting the enforceability of the remaining terms and conditions.
+
+     c.	No term or condition of this Public License will be waived and no failure to comply consented to unless expressly agreed to by the Licensor.
+
+     d.	Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be interpreted as a limitation upon, or waiver of, any privileges and immunities that apply to the Licensor or You, including from the legal processes of any jurisdiction or authority.
+
+Creative Commons is not a party to its public licenses. Notwithstanding, Creative Commons may elect to apply one of its public licenses to material it publishes and in those instances will be considered the “Licensor.” Except for the limited purpose of indicating that material is shared under a Creative Commons public license or as otherwise permitted by the Creative Commons policies published at creativecommons.org/policies, Creative Commons does not authorize the use of the trademark “Creative Commons” or any other trademark or logo of Creative Commons without its prior written consent including, without limitation, in connection with any unauthorized modifications to any of its public licenses or any other arrangements, understandings, or agreements concerning use of licensed material. For the avoidance of doubt, this paragraph does not form part of the public licenses.
+
+Creative Commons may be contacted at creativecommons.org.

docs/oss/licenses/MIT.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+MIT License
+
+Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and
+associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including
+without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the
+following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial
+portions of the Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO
+EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER
+IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE
+USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

docs/policy/agents.md

@@ -1,12 +1,14 @@
 # Agent Policy
 
-**Base Policy Version:** 1.1
+**Base Policy Version:** 1.3
 
-**Last Updated**: 2026-09-23
+**Last Updated**: 2026-09-28
+
+**Upstream Source:** [Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/policy/agents.md)
 
 ## Purpose
 
-Agents working in this repository must read and adhere to the following house rules.
+Agents must read and follow these rules.
 
 ## Implementation Discipline
 
@@ -14,8 +16,6 @@ Agents working in this repository must read and adhere to the following house ru
 request. Do not implicitly strengthen requirements, restrictions, or guarantees
 beyond what the user actually requested.
 
-Simplify the mechanism, not the user's choices.
-
 **Keep implementation machinery proportionate.** Use straightforward,
 idiomatic code and introduce only the machinery needed to support the requested
 behavior and flexibility. Optimize for conceptual simplicity and
@@ -57,15 +57,15 @@ the ambiguity rather than treating repetition as approval.
 
 ## Git Commit Policy
 
-By default, create a commit after completing each coherent unit of work, using a
+By default, commit each completed, nonempty unit of work using a
 concise, plain-English message describing what changed. This policy is standing
 authorization to create those local commits; a separate user request is not
 required. An explicit user instruction to leave work uncommitted takes precedence.
 
 A unit of work is a focused, reviewable outcome, including its relevant tests and
-documentation. Do not commit after every intermediate edit or create empty commits.
+documentation.
 Complete the appropriate validation before committing. If work is incomplete or
-validation is blocked, report that state rather than presenting it as completed.
+validation is blocked, report that state accurately.
 
 Before committing:
 
@@ -73,10 +73,10 @@ Before committing:
    changes. Identify changes that predate the current unit of work.
 2. Exclude secrets, local environment files, generated junk, and unrelated changes.
 3. Stage only the files or hunks belonging to the completed unit. Use `git add .`
-   only when every included change belongs to that unit. Do not disturb unrelated
-   staged or unstaged work.
-4. Review `git diff --staged` and run appropriate checks for the change. Do not
-   repeat checks already passed for unchanged content merely to create a commit.
+   only when every included change belongs to that unit. Preserve unrelated
+   staged and unstaged work.
+4. Review `git diff --staged` and run appropriate checks for the change. Reuse
+   successful checks for unchanged content.
 5. Review `git log --oneline -n 10` and use
    `git commit -m "<concise plain-English commit message>"`.
 6. Report the commit identifier and any remaining uncommitted work.

docs/policy/architecture.md

@@ -1,18 +1,38 @@
 # Architecture Policy
 
-**Base Policy Version:** 1.0
+**Base Policy Version:** 1.3
 
-**Last Updated:** 2026-09-06
+**Last Updated**: 2026-09-28
 
-## Purpose and applicability
+**Upstream Source:** [Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/policy/architecture.md)
+
+## Purpose And Ownership
+
+The adopted policy defines the application's purpose and the architectural
+constraints contributors must follow. It owns system boundaries, responsibility
+and dependency rules, established invariants, and explicit non-goals.
+
+Describe the concrete package inventory and implementation mechanics in internal
+documentation. Link to canonical public contracts for their exact behavior and
+to ADRs for decision rationale.
 
 ConfigKit is an opinionated Go library for consistent YAML configuration loading
-and resolution across consuming applications. This policy governs contributions.
-The [component overview](../internal/overview.md) owns implementation inventory, the
-[configuration contract](../config.md) owns implemented behavior, and the
-[deferred scope](../roadmap/deferred.md) preserves deferred scope.
+and resolution across consuming applications. The [component overview](../internal/overview.md)
+owns implementation inventory, the [configuration contract](../config.md) owns
+implemented behavior, and the [deferred scope](../roadmap/deferred.md) preserves
+deferred scope.
 
-## Success criteria
+## Adopted Constraints And Implemented Structure
+
+Architectural constraints govern current and future development. Record
+implemented structure accurately, proposals and implementation status in the
+roadmap, and significant decisions and rationale in ADRs. Describe a target
+structure as implemented when its changes land.
+
+Constraints must reflect deliberately selected requirements and decisions.
+Do not promote incidental implementation choices into architectural invariants.
+
+## Success Criteria
 
 1. **Reduce application infrastructure:** Can applications delete substantial
    configuration infrastructure while retaining clear ownership of their domain
@@ -51,7 +71,7 @@ boundaries, and keep simple consumers independent of optional composition
 features. The [consumer adoption guide](../consumers/README.md) demonstrates the
 implemented surface against representative simple and complex shapes.
 
-## Responsibility boundaries
+## Responsibility Boundaries
 
 ConfigKit owns configuration input processing and the coordination of decoding,
 resolution, validation, and inspection. Applications own their configuration
@@ -68,7 +88,7 @@ must never run implicitly as part of configuration loading.
 Remote data can enter through application-supplied input without introducing a
 network provider into the library.
 
-## Public API and dependency direction
+## Public API And Dependency Direction
 
 Keep one small, coherent public surface for the supported lifecycle. Simple
 single-document consumers must not need import, overlay, or provider machinery.
@@ -94,7 +114,7 @@ Dependencies must preserve those boundaries; package splits and abstractions
 must earn their complexity. Do not impose a full application or hexagonal
 framework on this library.
 
-## Configuration integrity
+## Configuration Integrity
 
 Composition and intentional overlay are distinct operations. Composition must
 not silently become last-wins override through file ordering. The decision and
@@ -122,7 +142,7 @@ See [ADR 0005](../adr/0005-explicit-overrides-and-safe-explanation.md).
 Detailed syntax and operation tables belong to the
 [current configuration contract](../config.md).
 
-## Ownership and confidentiality
+## Ownership And Confidentiality
 
 Returned configuration and metadata must not share mutable state across loads.
 ConfigKit must not mutate a result after returning it. Ordinary exported Go
@@ -143,7 +163,7 @@ forwarded blindly when they can include raw input. Do not log configuration
 implicitly. Applications remain responsible for classifying their secrets and
 for safe messages supplied by their hooks.
 
-## Scope boundaries
+## Scope Boundaries
 
 Do not introduce automatic directory discovery, network providers, arbitrary
 merge strategies, additional configuration languages, or application runtime

docs/policy/documentation.md

@@ -1,126 +1,176 @@
 # Documentation Policy
 
-**Base Policy Version:** 1.1
+**Base Policy Version:** 1.11
 
-**Last Updated:** 2026-09-23
+**Last Updated**: 2026-09-28
+
+**Upstream Source:** [Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/policy/documentation.md)
 
 ## Purpose
 
-Assign each documentation topic one canonical owner so ConfigKit's documentation
-remains accurate and useful to consumers, maintainers, and implementation agents.
+This policy assigns each documentation topic to one canonical owner. Its goal is
+to keep ConfigKit's documentation accurate, concise, discoverable, and resistant
+to drift for consumers, maintainers, developers, and coding agents.
 
-## Core rules
+## Core Rules
 
-### One canonical owner
+### One Canonical Owner
 
-Each authoritative fact belongs in one owning document or Go declaration's
-reference documentation. Other documents may summarize and link to that owner;
-they must not maintain competing definitions of commands, API contracts, YAML
-semantics, defaults, paths, diagnostics, or compatibility guarantees.
+Each authoritative fact belongs in one document. A non-owning document may give
+a short, stable summary for orientation, but it must link to the canonical owner
+for volatile details.
 
-### Policies, current behavior, and future work
+Volatile details include commands, flags, configuration fields and defaults,
+module keys, schemas, file names, paths, status codes, retry behavior, and
+runtime guarantees. If readers could reasonably treat a statement as a
+contract, maintain it only in the owning document.
 
-- Policies state currently binding contributor rules, including constraints on
-  future implementation. They do not imply that features already exist.
-- Current API/configuration contracts, consumer guidance, and component
-  documentation describe implemented behavior only, including partial boundaries.
-- ADRs record accepted decisions and rationale. Acceptance is not evidence of
-  implementation; execution status belongs in roadmaps.
-- Roadmaps own unimplemented targets, deferred work, and execution status.
+### Current And Future Behavior
 
-Future implementation plans own their task order, acceptance gates, and progress;
-`docs/roadmap/deferred.md` owns deliberate exclusions, not execution instructions.
-As behavior lands, move its normative definition into the current contract and
-replace the roadmap definition with a link. Retire completed roadmap material
-as part of release preparation; ADRs preserve significant decision history.
+Outside `docs/roadmap/`, documentation describes implemented behavior only.
+Partial features may be described only to their implemented boundary.
 
-### Audience and examples
+Architectural constraints may govern future changes. Describe current structure
+from implemented behavior.
 
-Consumer documentation explains how to use the library and what consumers own.
-Internal documents explain mechanisms and dependencies. Keep implementation
-mechanics out of consumer guidance unless they affect a meaningful choice.
+ADRs may record an accepted architectural decision before implementation. The
+roadmap owns implementation status and sequencing until the decision is
+implemented. Current architecture, user, operator, integration, and internal
+documentation are updated when the behavior lands.
 
-Complete copyable artifacts belong in `examples/`; Go API examples may live in
-executable Go example tests beside the relevant package. Prose should use the
-smallest useful excerpt and link to the maintained artifact. Examples must be
-secret-free and checked against implemented behavior. Clearly label illustrative
-future syntax in roadmaps; do not present it as a runnable current example.
+`docs/roadmap/deferred.md` owns deliberate exclusions; task-specific plans
+own execution order and progress. Completed plans retire during release
+preparation.
 
-### Security and privacy
+### Audience And Detail
 
-Do not include real credentials, private keys, environment dumps, sensitive input,
-or private infrastructure details unless intentionally public. Document secret
-handling, not secret values.
+Write for the document's stated audience and include only the detail needed for
+its owned topic. Keep user and operator docs focused on using and operating the
+application. Developer docs should link to user-facing and external contracts
+for their definitions.
 
-## Canonical ownership
+### Examples
 
-| Topic | Owner | Boundary |
-| --- | --- | --- |
-| Product orientation | `README.md` | Current status, purpose, navigation, and a minimal working example |
-| Contributor entry point | `docs/development.md` | Reading guide and actual baseline validation commands |
-| Architecture rules | `docs/policy/architecture.md` | Responsibilities, dependency constraints, invariants, and scope boundaries |
-| Agent rules | `docs/policy/agents.md` | Implementation discipline, proportionality, rules against inventing contracts, and local commit authorization; not application contracts or architecture |
-| Documentation rules | `docs/policy/documentation.md` | Ownership and document lifecycle |
-| Testing rules | `docs/policy/testing.md` | Risk-based sufficiency, test boundaries, and maintenance principles |
-| Release rules | `docs/policy/release.md` | Compatibility, integrity, gates, immutability, and exceptions |
-| Release procedure | `docs/release.md` | Exact maintainer commands, prerequisites, supported targets, and verification |
-| Exported Go API | Go documentation beside declarations | Symbol contracts, errors, ownership, and lifecycle API behavior |
-| YAML and resolution semantics | `docs/config.md` | Syntax, composition, precedence, conversion, secret references/bootstrap, and explanation semantics; Go reference docs link here for shared rules |
-| Consumer walkthroughs | `docs/consumers/`, when useful | Task-oriented usage and consumer responsibilities, not duplicate API reference |
-| Component inventory | `docs/internal/overview.md` | Implemented components and links to their owners |
-| Component mechanics | Other `docs/internal/` files, when needed | Detailed implementation behavior and change recipes |
-| Architectural decisions | `docs/adr/` | Context, decisions, alternatives, consequences, and supersession history |
-| Deferred scope | `docs/roadmap/deferred.md` | Deliberate exclusions and the conditions for reconsidering them |
-| Future implementation plans | Task-specific files under `docs/roadmap/` | Unfinished work, task order, acceptance gates, and progress; completed plans retire to Git history |
-| Historical release notes | `docs/releases/` | Version-specific historical summaries required by release policy |
-| Complete examples | `examples/` and executable Go examples | Maintained artifacts; prose links instead of duplicating full examples |
+Complete copyable files belong in `examples/`. Documentation may use the
+smallest illustrative snippet needed to explain its owned topic, but should link
+to maintained examples for complete copyable files.
 
-A listed owner is not a requirement to create an empty file before it has useful
-content. Create API, consumer, example, and component documents when the corresponding behavior
-exists and there is useful content to own. Link only to existing files; use plain
-code paths for planned files. Unvalidated candidate and publication work has the
-explicit temporary exception recorded in the release policy.
+Executable Go API examples may live beside the relevant package.
 
-ConfigKit has no owned HTTP service, application CLI, or runtime operations
-interface. Do not create those reference documents for consuming applications.
+Examples must be valid, secret-free, and tested where practical. Commands and
+configuration used in documentation should match the application.
 
-## Boundary rules
+### Security And Privacy
 
-Architecture owns governing constraints; ADRs explain why; contracts describe
-implemented semantics; internal documentation explains how. A roadmap may link
-to all of them but must not become a second current reference.
+Documentation and examples must not contain real credentials, private keys,
+private environment dumps, sensitive source material, or private infrastructure
+details unless intentionally public. Document secret-handling mechanisms, not
+secret values.
 
-Release policy owns guarantees; the release procedure owns commands. A release
-note cannot redefine a compatibility contract or replace a current-documentation
-update. The note at an immutable tag is that release's historical record.
+## Canonical Ownership
 
-This policy owns what documentation may disclose. Architecture owns security
-invariants. Current configuration and Go API contracts own secret-classification
-and rendering behavior when implemented; internal docs own their mechanisms.
+| Topic | Canonical owner | Owned content | Content owned elsewhere |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| Product orientation and minimal example | `README.md` | Purpose, current status, shortest useful Go example, and navigation, including licensing and attribution. | Full Go API and configuration contracts, release procedure, and implementation detail. |
+| Contributor entry point | `docs/development.md` | Task-oriented reading guide, contributor orientation, baseline validation commands, and canonical links. | Package inventory, architecture rules, subsystem behavior, detailed change recipes. |
+| Application architecture policy | `docs/policy/architecture.md` | System shape, normative ownership, dependency direction, boundaries, invariants, safety properties, and non-goals. | Concrete package inventory, implementation mechanics, contributor procedures, decision history, future work. |
+| Policy-set provenance and upstream navigation | `docs/policy/meta.md` | Policy-set origin, local authority, adoption baselines, and upstream adoption and update links. | Task-specific reading triggers, detailed adoption procedures, and formal attribution notices. |
+| Agent policy | `docs/policy/agents.md` | Proportionate, idiomatic implementation; rules against inventing requirements, restrictions, guarantees, or policy. | Application contracts, architecture, testing policy, and contributor procedures. |
+| Documentation policy | `docs/policy/documentation.md` | Documentation ownership, audience boundaries, maintenance rules, and ADR/document lifecycle. | Application architecture or product behavior. |
+| Testing policy | `docs/policy/testing.md` | Test philosophy, risk sufficiency, boundaries, doubles, coverage, regressions, and test maintenance. | Subsystem behavior, application contracts, subsystem-specific test inventories, and implementation plans. |
+| Release policy | `docs/policy/release.md` | Versioning, compatibility, release integrity and immutability, release documentation, proportionate gates, publication controls, completion, and required versus optional checks. | Repository-specific commands, product installation guidance, CLI version semantics, historical release summaries, and CI implementation detail. |
+| Open source licensing and attribution policy | `docs/policy/oss.md` | License defaults and author choices, COPYRIGHT and attribution formats, license/notice links, discoverability, maintenance, and concrete exceptions. | Component entries, license texts, release commands, and dependency security review. |
+| Project copyright and license grant | `COPYRIGHT` | Project identity, copyright holders and years, SPDX expression, code grant, separately licensed document scope, warranty disclaimer, and third-party statement. | Complete license texts and upstream component attribution. |
+| Project license texts | `LICENSE` | Complete project and incorporated companion license texts, with required project-specific fields. | General licensing policy and upstream component attribution. |
+| Upstream component attribution | `docs/oss/attribution.md` | House Format entries for dependencies and adapted documents: identity, material scope, copyright, license, notices, and source links. | General policy, exception reasoning, and complete standard license texts. |
+| Standard license texts | `docs/oss/licenses/` | Complete, verbatim standard license texts shared by applicable entries, including copied documentation. | Project-specific upstream notices, attribution prose, and policy interpretation. |
+| Repository-specific release procedure | `docs/release.md` | Maintainer prerequisites, candidate preparation, validation and publication commands and automated guards, asynchronous deliverables, delivery status, optional consumer verification, and recovery. | General release requirements, product installation guidance, historical release summaries, and current compatibility contracts. |
+| Exported Go API | Go documentation beside declarations | Symbol contracts, errors, ownership, and lifecycle behavior. | Shared YAML semantics and complete examples. |
+| Configuration contract | `docs/config.md` | YAML syntax, composition, precedence, schema, defaults, resolution, validation, secrets, and explanation semantics. | Go symbol contracts, complete examples, and implementation detail. |
+| Consumer guidance for the public Go API | `docs/consumers/` | Task-oriented public Go API usage, minimal examples, and consumer responsibilities. | Go symbol contracts, configuration semantics, and internal implementation detail. |
+| Inventory of implemented internal packages | `docs/internal/overview.md` | Implemented packages and components, responsibilities, and links to focused internal docs. | Normative architecture, contributor reading policy, external contracts. |
+| Behavior and architecture of internal packages | Other files under `docs/internal/` | Implementation flow, collaborators, state transitions, package-local guarantees and failures, and relevant tests. | Global architecture invariants, configuration definitions and defaults, external schemas, operator procedures. |
+| Architectural decision records | `docs/adr/` | Significant decisions, context, alternatives, rationale, consequences, and supersession history. | Current behavior reference, implementation status, task sequencing. |
+| Deferred scope | `docs/roadmap/deferred.md` | Deliberate exclusions and conditions for reconsideration. | Task execution and current behavior. |
+| Future implementation plans | Task-specific files under `docs/roadmap/` | Unfinished work, sequencing, acceptance, and progress; completed plans retire during release preparation. | Implemented behavior and ADR rationale. |
+| Release-note history | `docs/releases/` | One checked-in summary per source release under the procedure; the note at its immutable tag is the release record. | Current commands, behavior, contracts, and compatibility definitions. |
+| Complete examples | `examples/` and executable Go examples | Maintained copyable artifacts and Go API examples. | Configuration reference, symbol contracts, and prose explanation. |
 
-## Architectural decision records
+Create supporting documents for existing interfaces and responsibilities when
+substantive content is available.
 
-Use sequential filenames, such as `0001-separate-composition-and-overlay.md`,
-and the lightweight Nygard structure: title, status, date, context, decision,
-alternatives considered, and consequences.
+Do not create empty owners.
 
-Accepted decision content is immutable. A changed decision requires a new ADR
-and a superseded status/link in the old one. Navigation links may be repaired
-when specification ownership moves without rewriting historical rationale.
-Rejected architectural alternatives belong in ADRs; deferred or rejected product
-features belong in roadmaps. Do not create an ADR for every routine choice.
+## Boundary Rules
 
-## Maintenance and verification
+### Orientation
 
-Update the owning current documentation in the same change that implements or
-changes behavior. When ownership moves, remove the old definition and preserve
-useful navigation links.
+Link among orientation, architecture, and internal documents; maintain each
+package or behavior description in its canonical owner.
+
+### Go API And Configuration
+
+Go declaration documentation owns exported symbol behavior. The configuration
+contract owns shared YAML and resolution semantics. Consumer guidance explains
+tasks and links to those contracts.
+
+### Releases
+
+The release policy defines requirements and invariants that every release must
+satisfy. The repository-specific release procedure defines the commands and
+workflow maintainers use to satisfy that policy. Release notes record history
+at immutable tags. Maintain current behavior in its canonical documentation,
+update it with the corresponding behavior changes, and keep release procedures
+consistent with adopted policy.
+
+### Project Licensing And Upstream Attribution
+
+README and release documents link to the canonical licensing and attribution
+materials under the [OSS policy](oss.md). The release procedure owns URL
+construction and publication mechanics.
+
+### Contracts And Implementation
+
+Go API and configuration documents define externally observable behavior.
+Internal documents explain implementation and link to the owning contract.
+
+### Security Topics
+
+This policy owns what documentation and examples may contain. Architecture owns
+application security invariants. The configuration and public API contracts own
+secret-classification, bootstrap, and rendering behavior. Internal docs own
+implementation mechanisms only.
+
+## Architecture Decision Records
+
+Use sequentially numbered ADR filenames such as
+`0001-record-architecture-decisions.md`. Follow the lightweight Nygard format:
+
+1. title;
+2. status;
+3. date;
+4. context;
+5. decision;
+6. alternatives considered;
+7. consequences.
+
+Treat the decision content of an accepted ADR as immutable. When a decision
+changes, create a new ADR and update the earlier ADR's status to superseded.
+Rejected architectural alternatives belong in the ADR; rejected product ideas
+belong in the roadmap. Routine choices need no ADR.
+
+## Maintenance
+
+When behavior changes, update its canonical owner in the same change. If
+ownership moves, remove the old definition and replace it with a link where
+navigation remains useful.
 
 Before completing documentation work:
 
-- verify claims against the implementation or clearly identify future design;
-- check changed local links, paths, fragments, examples, and commands;
-- preserve the distinction between policy, decisions, target behavior, and status;
-- check canonical ownership and remove stale or duplicate definitions;
-- inspect formatting and whitespace;
-- ensure no sensitive data was introduced.
+- verify affected behavior and examples;
+- check commands, flags, fields, defaults, schemas, and paths against their
+  implementation;
+- keep unimplemented behavior in the roadmap, subject to the ADR exception;
+- remove stale references and validate links;
+- confirm that non-owning documents summarize and link rather than redefine;
+- confirm that no secrets or sensitive private data were added.

docs/policy/meta.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+# Policy Set Provenance
+
+**Base Policy Version:** 1.0
+
+**Last Updated**: 2026-09-28
+
+**Upstream Source:** [Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/policy/meta.md)
+
+## Origin And Local Authority
+
+This repository's policy set is adapted from
+[Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy).
+The adopted local policies govern work in this repository. Upstream revisions
+become local policy through deliberate adoption, preserving local decisions.
+Each policy's `Upstream Source` identifies its adopted baseline.
+
+## Adoption And Updates
+
+For policy adoption, upstream revision reviews, and updates, consult the
+[upstream adoption and update guide](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/branch/main/docs/adoption.md).
+That guide and the reference example collection are maintained upstream and
+accessed through links. Keep discovery links pointed at the current upstream
+project and guide; keep adopted-source and example links pinned to commits.
+
+The local [developer guide](../development.md) routes tasks to applicable
+policies. Formal credit and licensing notices for the copied policy material
+belong in the local [attribution document](../oss/attribution.md).

docs/policy/oss.md

@@ -0,0 +1,217 @@
+# Open Source Licensing And Attribution Policy
+
+**Base Policy Version:** 1.8
+
+**Last Updated**: 2026-09-28
+
+**Upstream Source:** [Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/policy/oss.md)
+
+## ConfigKit Applicability
+
+ConfigKit's selected grant is LGPL-3.0-or-later, recorded in
+[COPYRIGHT](../../COPYRIGHT), with the complete LGPLv3 and incorporated GPLv3
+texts in [LICENSE](../../LICENSE). The [release procedure](../release.md)
+owns source-only Go module publication through Gitea. No separate hosted release
+object or license asset is required for this channel.
+
+## Purpose And Scope
+
+This policy defines project licensing conventions and a repeatable House Format
+for upstream attribution and license notices. It covers the project's own code
+and upstream components incorporated into or distributed with the application
+or library, including relevant transitive dependencies and copied code,
+documentation, or assets.
+Determine treatment from the component's terms and actual use.
+
+Consulting development guidance or using tooling alone does not require an
+attribution entry. Copying or adapting documentation for inclusion in the
+repository is different: preserve its applicable attribution and license terms.
+A material's role as development guidance does not exempt copied documents.
+Apply any express permissions for attribution-free reuse of example formatting.
+
+The baseline is a publicly available source repository with releases published
+alongside it. The format is independent of language, forge, and build system.
+It does not require attribution for every development tool, establish license
+compatibility, or resolve every obligation arising from use or distribution.
+
+## Canonical Locations
+
+The [documentation policy](documentation.md) assigns ownership:
+
+- `COPYRIGHT`: project name, copyright statements, SPDX expression, grant,
+  warranty disclaimer, and third-party statement.
+- `LICENSE` contains the complete, unmodified project license text, including
+  incorporated companion text. Dependency attribution does not relicense the project.
+- `docs/oss/attribution.md`: canonical component entries.
+- `docs/oss/licenses/`: complete, verbatim standard and applicable companion texts.
+
+Use recognizable license filenames, such as `Apache-2.0.txt` or `LGPL-3.0.txt`.
+A shared standard text may serve multiple entries. Keep explanations outside
+license texts and preserve distinct versions and exceptions.
+
+## Upstream Reference Examples
+
+Use the commit-pinned upstream examples to create actual project notices.
+Retain their links and keep the example collection upstream; keep applicable
+license texts locally as specified above. The
+[standard license-text collection](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/oss/licenses/README.md)
+identifies the available reference texts.
+
+## Project Licensing
+
+Unless the author specifies otherwise, use **GPL version 3 or later**
+(`GPL-3.0-or-later`) for applications and **LGPL version 3 or later**
+(`LGPL-3.0-or-later`) for libraries. An author's explicit choice takes precedence:
+for example, a one-off script may use MIT. Such a choice requires no exception
+rationale, additional approval, or compensating controls under this policy.
+
+These defaults guide new license selection. Adopting this policy does not
+relicense existing code or override third-party terms. Preserve an existing
+license unless the author deliberately changes it. For mixed-purpose projects,
+follow the author's selected scope rather than inferring different licenses for
+individual packages.
+
+Use the upstream [application COPYRIGHT example](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/examples/licensing/application/COPYRIGHT)
+or [library COPYRIGHT example](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/examples/licensing/library/COPYRIGHT)
+to create the project’s root `COPYRIGHT` file.
+Use verified project names, contribution years, and copyright holders.
+For another selected license, adapt the grant, SPDX expression, disclaimer, and
+text references together to reflect the author's selected grant.
+
+For GPLv3 projects, copy the complete GPLv3 text into `LICENSE`. For LGPLv3
+projects, place the complete LGPLv3 text followed by the complete GPLv3 text in
+`LICENSE`; the LGPL incorporates the GPL terms. Keep the texts unmodified and
+place project-specific statements in `COPYRIGHT`. For the default grants, the
+grant and SPDX expression in `COPYRIGHT` must expressly identify `or-later`;
+follow the author’s choice if a different grant is selected.
+
+For other licenses, provide their complete text and any required project-specific
+fields; the standard reference collection remains unchanged. Keep `COPYRIGHT`,
+`LICENSE`, SPDX expressions, and README descriptions consistent with the actual
+grant. This convention introduces no blanket requirement for per-file headers;
+preserve notices or add them where the applicable terms require them.
+
+Identify separately licensed documentation or assets in the project grant, with
+links to their attribution and license information. An application's default
+code license does not override the terms of incorporated documentation.
+
+## Upstream Attribution House Format
+
+Begin `docs/oss/attribution.md` with `# Open Source Attribution Notices`,
+followed directly by component entries. These comprise the complete document.
+
+Each entry presents these five fields in order, with blank lines between them:
+
+1. **Project name** as a level-two heading. An optional identification paragraph
+   may follow, such as `Selected module: MODULE at VERSION.` with the module and
+   version in backticks. For copied documentation, a concise `Material:` sentence
+   may identify the affected files and whether they were adapted or copied
+   without modification. A factual qualifier such as `(transitive dependency)`
+   is permitted. Limit optional identification prose to factual component and
+   material scope.
+2. **Upstream copyright statement or statements**, preserving their wording.
+   Put multiple statements in separate paragraphs. Include this field when the
+   selected upstream source supplies an applicable statement; otherwise, omit it.
+3. **SPDX license identifier or expression**, when applicable, using
+   `SPDX-License-Identifier: EXPRESSION`.
+4. **License and notice links**, beginning `License and notices:`, separated
+   by ` | `, and ending with a period. Label local standard texts by license
+   name, such as `MIT` or `Apache 2.0`. Label upstream files by their actual
+   filenames, such as `COPYRIGHT`, `LICENSE`, `NOTICE`, or `PATENTS`.
+5. **Source repository link**, rendered exactly as `[Source](COMMIT_URL).`.
+
+Use the upstream [attribution example](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/examples/licensing/attribution.md)
+to create the project’s `docs/oss/attribution.md`.
+The example illustrates omitted fields and multiple copyrights and licenses.
+Replace the uppercase placeholders and illustrative URLs with actual component
+information. Local license links are relative to the destination
+`docs/oss/attribution.md`; copy the applicable texts into its `licenses/`
+directory. Do not copy example entries for components the project does not use.
+
+These are five fields, not a line limit. Omit the SPDX field when no applicable
+identifier exists; identify nonstandard terms through the linked text. Preserve
+licensing alternatives and exceptions, and record a selected option when
+relevant through the factual license identification. Do not invent an identifier
+or silently resolve an unsettled licensing choice.
+
+Keep entries factual. Do not add agent-authored explanations of license
+expressions, file-level license scope, research performed, retained source
+notices, or compliance conclusions. Avoid filler such as "none is invented
+here" and embellished link labels such as "upstream LICENSE", "additional
+patent grant", or "at the imported commit". Preserve actual required upstream
+content; this rule excludes editorial additions, not required notices. Policy
+interpretation and exception reasoning belong in the adopted OSS policy or an
+appropriate decision record, not the attribution document.
+
+## License Texts And Upstream Links
+
+Link standard license texts to their local copies. Link project-specific
+notices to their upstream copies. Every upstream repository or notice link must
+identify the exact commit corresponding to the
+imported version, including the selected source revision for copied material.
+
+Classify material according to its contents. An upstream `LICENSE`,
+`COPYING`, or similar file may contain project-specific notices or exceptions
+in addition to standard wording. Link both the local standard text and the
+commit-specific upstream file when needed. Make companion license texts directly
+reachable from the entry.
+
+For project-specific license and attribution material, this policy accepts
+direct links to the applicable upstream texts as satisfying reproduction,
+inclusion, or copy requirements. This is the adopted house interpretation.
+Agents must apply it without adding local-copy requirements or seeking repeated
+approval solely because a license uses those terms.
+
+This interpretation concerns notice reproduction. Concrete obligations such as
+marking modified files or supplying corresponding source receive their own
+applicable treatment. Preserve required notices already present in incorporated
+source files; the central attribution entry does not authorize stripping them.
+
+## Discoverability
+
+End the project's README with two friendly statements linking to its actual
+grant in `COPYRIGHT` and the attribution document. ConfigKit's
+[README](../../README.md) contains the two required statements: one linking to
+the project grant and one linking to attribution.
+
+Each new checked-in release document and its hosted download page must end
+with links whose visible text is `COPYRIGHT | LICENSE | ATTRIBUTION`. Use absolute
+URLs to those files at the release's immutable tag or corresponding immutable source
+revision so the links work in both locations. This release navigation is distinct
+from upstream component links, which must use the imported commit.
+
+Reuse the checked-in release document as the hosted release body where supported.
+The release procedure owns concrete URLs and publication mechanics for delivering
+the links through the selected channel. Do not maintain duplicate notice lists.
+These conventions do not by themselves require separate downloadable license
+assets, source bundles, or a different binary package format.
+
+## Maintenance And Exceptions
+
+Update project licensing statements together when the author changes the grant
+or its scope. Update upstream notices in the change that adds, removes, upgrades,
+copies, or changes the distribution of a relevant component. Check the selected source's license
+and notices rather than assuming they are unchanged. Update affected entries,
+commit links, and texts; retain historical versions through Git.
+
+Check affected statements, faithful standard-text copies, and link destinations
+as part of ordinary change review. For a future release tag, check intended file
+paths against the candidate source; the tag need not resolve remotely before
+publication. Do not add publication-time network checks, CI polling, recurring
+legal sign-offs, mandatory scanners, or a full software bill of materials merely
+to implement this policy.
+
+Use the House Format routinely. Raise an exception only for a concrete obligation
+or unresolved rights question it does not address, including any arising from a
+particular distribution channel. Record the issue and selected treatment in the
+adopted OSS policy or an appropriate decision record. Attribution entries
+contain the resulting factual identification and required material, without
+repeating that reasoning. Resolve the issue before the affected use or
+distribution without reopening settled choices.
+Common ownership of projects is neither required nor a blanket exception.
+
+Apply the formatting convention prospectively. Do not rewrite published tags,
+notes, binaries, or checksums to retrofit it. Address actual omissions deliberately
+under the applicable terms and the [release correction policy](release.md#immutability-and-correction).
+Ordinary attribution maintenance and release links are preparation work, not new
+release approval gates.

docs/policy/release.md

@@ -1,42 +1,36 @@
 # Release Policy
 
-**Base Policy Version:** 1.0
+**Base Policy Version:** 1.4
 
-**Last Updated:** 2026-09-23
+**Last Updated**: 2026-09-28
+
+**Upstream Source:** [Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/policy/release.md)
 
 ## Purpose
 
-This policy defines the minimum requirements for selecting, validating,
-publishing, verifying, and correcting releases. Its goal is to make every
-release intentional, reproducible from an exact source revision, documented
-for consumers, and safe from retrospective replacement.
+This policy defines a proportionate workflow for validating and publishing an
+intended source revision under a fresh version. Releases should require little
+routine intervention, avoid repeated work, and preserve published contents.
 
-The repository-specific commands that implement these requirements belong in
-`docs/release.md`. Historical release summaries belong in `docs/releases/`.
-Neither document may weaken this policy.
+The repository-specific commands belong in `docs/release.md`. Historical release
+summaries belong in `docs/releases/`. The procedure must agree with the adopted
+policy and link to it rather than introduce additional release requirements.
 
-## ConfigKit applicability
+## ConfigKit Applicability
 
-ConfigKit adopts a source-only Go module release model. The source tag and
-version-matched release note are the declared deliverables. Standalone binaries,
-container images, and separate binary/package-registry publication are not
-required. This does not waive source compilation, module hygiene, testing, or
-local target-build validation. Post-publication consumer retrieval is optional,
-as documented under Policy Exceptions.
+ConfigKit publishes a source-only Go module. Its declared deliverables are the
+immutable annotated source tag and version-matched checked-in release note.
+Standalone binaries, container images, hosted release objects, and separate
+registry publication are not required. Additional channels require a deliberate
+update to the policy and procedure.
 
-The release procedure must define the module path, authoritative remote,
-supported Go versions and operating-system/architecture targets, prerequisite
-dependency acquisition, and the exact verification commands once established.
-The default tests themselves remain deterministic and offline. Additional
-publication channels require documented deliverables and verification before use.
-
-The Go API, documented YAML/resolution semantics, and structured diagnostic
-contracts all participate in compatibility review. A signature-preserving change
+The Go API, documented YAML and resolution semantics, and structured diagnostic
+contracts participate in compatibility review. A signature-preserving change
 can still break consumers. Human diagnostic wording is stable only where a
-contract expressly promises it. Minimum Go version and platform support changes
-also require an explicit compatibility assessment.
+contract expressly promises it. Minimum Go version and platform support
+changes also require an explicit compatibility assessment.
 
-### Platform support
+### Platform Support
 
 Linux is the release-validated platform. macOS has best-effort support: keeping
 it working remains desirable, but neither native macOS validation nor Darwin
@@ -45,48 +39,59 @@ does not by itself block a release. Voluntary checks and fixes are welcome; ther
 is no guarantee that each release has been validated on macOS.
 
 The [release procedure](../release.md#release-identity-and-support) owns target
-architectures and required Linux checks. This support change applies to upcoming
-releases; historical release notes and their validation records remain unchanged.
-The v0.3.0 release note must explain the change in Compatibility, with version
-selection following this policy's existing compatibility rules.
+architectures and required Linux checks. Historical release notes and their
+validation records remain unchanged.
 
-## Release Model
+## Release Model And Completion
 
-A release consists of:
+A source release identifies one exact committed source revision through an
+immutable version tag and a version-matched, checked-in release note. The
+primary release branch is `main` unless the adopted policy specifies otherwise.
+The procedure must name the authoritative publication remote.
 
-- one exact source commit reachable from the repository's primary branch;
-- one immutable version tag identifying that commit;
-- one version-matched, checked-in release note; and
-- every artifact, image, package, registry entry, or other deliverable the
-  repository declares for that release.
+A successful push of the intended tag, with its source commit available on the
+authoritative primary branch, completes the release. The source commit may be
+pushed before the tag or published together with it through an atomic push.
+The procedure must choose and document the supported approach.
 
-The repository's primary branch is `main` unless an adopted policy documents
-an exception. A release candidate must be committed and pushed to that branch
-before its release tag is published.
+ConfigKit uses sequential explicit pushes: first the captured candidate to
+authoritative `main`, then the annotated tag. Its
+[release procedure](../release.md) names `origin` and checks that its fetch and
+push destinations resolve to the authoritative URL.
 
-The source tag is the authoritative release identity. Published deliverables
-must be traceable to the tagged source and must agree with its version. A
-repository may publish source only. When it publishes additional deliverables,
-its release procedure must enumerate them and define how each is built,
-identified, published, and verified.
+Release commands must finish at successful publication. They must not wait for
+or poll CI, require successful CI status, inspect downloadable artifacts, or
+check consumer installation or Go module availability as completion gates.
+A failed or ambiguous push requires resolving the authoritative remote state
+before declaring success or retrying; successful pushes do not require a
+separate remote read-back gate.
 
-Release automation may validate or publish a release only when its exact
-responsibility is documented. Automation must not silently change the source
-candidate, move a published tag, replace a published deliverable, or repair a
-release in place.
+Remote tag read-back and fresh consumer retrieval are optional and non-gating
+after successful publication. A failed push receives one bounded check of the
+authoritative ref; do not poll or blindly retry.
 
-A successful push of the intended annotated tag completes the source-only release.
-Never wait for CI or use its status as a readiness or completion gate. Optional
-post-publication checks must not delay reporting success.
+Repositories may publish source only. Additional binaries, images, packages,
+checksums, or other declared deliverables may be published asynchronously from
+the tagged source. The procedure must identify those deliverables and the
+responsibility of their automation. Published deliverables must be traceable
+to that source and identify the same version.
+
+ConfigKit currently declares no additional deliverables. Its source-tag push
+is the completion point.
 
 ## Versioning And Compatibility
 
 Stable releases use Semantic Versioning in the form `vMAJOR.MINOR.PATCH`, with
-no leading zeroes. Each version must be unused locally and in every configured
-remote or publication channel before publication begins.
+no leading zeroes. Prereleases require an explicit adopted policy defining
+their format and use.
 
-Unless an adopted policy explicitly supports and defines prereleases,
-prerelease versions are not permitted.
+ConfigKit does not support prereleases.
+
+The selected version must be unused locally and on the authoritative remote.
+Do not require queries to every configured remote or publication service.
+A version known to have already been published must not be reused, even if the
+normal guards do not inspect that channel. Adding a distribution channel
+requires a deliberate update to the policy and procedure where needed.
 
 For releases at or after `v1.0.0`:
 
@@ -99,151 +104,163 @@ configuration, data, integration, or compatibility contract when the release
 note explains the impact and required consumer action. A patch release must
 not intentionally break those contracts within its minor line.
 
-A repository with additional compatibility promises must define them in its
-adopted policy or canonical contract documentation. A release note may explain
-a compatibility change, but it must not redefine the current compatibility
-contract.
+Additional compatibility promises and deliberate exceptions belong in the
+adopted policy or canonical contract documentation. Release notes explain
+changes; they do not redefine current compatibility contracts.
 
-## Release Documentation
+## Release Documentation And Preparation
 
-Every release made under this policy must include
-`docs/releases/<version>.md` in the tagged source tree. The filename must use
-the complete version tag, and the document must begin with a title containing
-the product name and that exact version.
+Every new release must include `docs/releases/<version>.md` in the tagged
+source tree. Use the complete version tag as the filename and begin with a
+title containing the product name and that exact version.
 
-Every new release note must contain these sections:
+ConfigKit requires the first line `# ConfigKit <version>`.
 
-```markdown
-# <Product> vMAJOR.MINOR.PATCH
+Include a short summary and any relevant compatibility impact or upgrade
+instructions. Choose sections suited to the release and keep the note
+proportionate to the change.
 
-This release ...
+Keep exact current contracts in their canonical documents and update affected
+documentation with the behavior change. Link to those documents from the note
+where useful. If annotated tags are used, derive their summary from the
+checked-in note.
 
-## Summary
+ConfigKit uses the complete checked-in note as the annotated tag message.
 
-## Compatibility
+Include the release footer defined by the [OSS policy](oss.md#discoverability)
+in each new release document. The release procedure defines the concrete URLs
+and publication mechanics. Prepare these links with the release note; they do
+not add a network check or approval gate. If a hosted download page is used in
+a future channel, preserve the footer there.
 
-## Upgrade
+Handle version selection, release-note content, and retirement of completed
+roadmaps during preparation. Preserve planned and deferred work and repair
+affected links when retiring roadmaps. Reuse ordinary change review for
+unintended files, credentials, and private data. Scope release-content review
+to the tagged source.
 
-## Changes
-```
+## Candidate Validation
 
-Use an explicit statement such as "No action required" when a section has no
-substantive content.
+Provide one publication command that validates the final committed candidate,
+checks publication state, and publishes the intended refs. A validation-only
+mode or command may be provided for diagnosis, but must not be a required step
+before publication repeats the same checks.
 
-Release notes are immutable historical summaries. They should link to current
-canonical documentation for exact behavior. Every affected canonical document
-must be updated in the same candidate; a release note must not substitute for
-current documentation or defer required documentation changes.
+ConfigKit uses `./scripts/release.sh vMAJOR.MINOR.PATCH`. The separate
+`scripts/release-check.sh` remains an optional diagnostic command; the
+publication command invokes it once and does not use a persistent candidate
+record.
 
-## Candidate Preparation And Validation
+Run the complete deterministic, offline default test suite once for the final
+candidate, following the [testing policy](testing.md). For repositories that
+publish builds, verify the required build targets. Select those targets for
+the application's actual support commitments; native testing on each platform
+and access to particular hardware are not default release prerequisites.
 
-ConfigKit provides one local release checker. Run it once against the final
-committed candidate using one maintained patch of the minimum supported Go line
-on Linux. It checks module hygiene, formatting and whitespace, the full offline
-suite with the race detector, static analysis, and CGO-disabled Linux amd64/arm64
-builds. Examples, documentation links, consumer fixtures, and package boundaries
-are covered by that suite, not separate repeated runs. Native package compilation
-is covered by the test run. A second toolchain is optional and non-gating.
+ConfigKit's one maintained Go 1.25 baseline runs the full suite with the race
+detector and test-time vet disabled. This protects library behavior, ownership,
+and concurrent use; the suite already includes examples, consumer fixtures,
+documentation links, and package boundaries. One full vet pass adds static
+checks beyond the test-time subset. CGO-disabled Linux amd64 and arm64 builds
+cover supported configurations distinct from native race compilation. macOS
+and newer-toolchain checks are optional.
 
-Commit the release note and associated changes before release validation. Record
-the exact validated commit; revalidate if the candidate changes. Do not require
-both pre-commit and post-commit full checker runs for unchanged content.
-Do not publish uncommitted or unvalidated content. Local check failures still
-block publication. Skipped test cases are reported, not separate human sign-off
-requirements.
+Additional gates must address a concrete risk that the existing checks do not
+adequately cover. Do not automatically require linting, race testing, module
+hygiene audits, documentation audits, credential scans, example validation, or
+expanded platform matrices solely because they are possible. Retain such
+checks when their distinct protection justifies their cost. A one-time migration
+check must not silently become a permanent release requirement.
 
-Compatibility review, release-note accuracy, removal of completed roadmaps, and
-review for unintended files, credentials, private data, and unrelated changes
-are ordinary preparation. The executing agent may perform them without routine
-human approval or separate manual evidence records. Ask the maintainer only for
-genuine unresolved decisions or missing authority. A clean existing checkout is
-sufficient; a dedicated clone is optional. Dependency and toolchain update
-research belongs to maintenance or relevant changes, not every release.
+The selected Go commands use readonly module mode with `GOPROXY=off`; acquire
+the baseline toolchain and dependencies before validation. Formatting and
+whitespace remain ordinary development checks in `scripts/check.sh`.
+Review module tidiness when dependencies change, not as a release gate.
+
+Release tests must not require real credentials, mutable application services,
+paid APIs, provider probes, or inference calls. The procedure may describe dependency
+preparation separately from offline validation.
+
+Avoid duplicate validation across release phases. Successful checks for the
+same final candidate need not be repeated solely to satisfy another phase;
+any reuse must clearly apply to that exact candidate. Persistent validation
+caches are not required. If the candidate changes, validate the new candidate.
+Cheap publication-state checks may be repeated immediately before pushing
+because local or remote state may have changed during validation.
+
+Automate mechanical guards. Human review gates are strongly disfavored: add one
+only through an explicit project-specific policy decision explaining the
+concrete risk and why ordinary change review or automation is insufficient.
+Do not add routine confirmations for checks the command can perform itself.
+
+Compatibility review, release-note accuracy, completed-roadmap retirement, and
+review for unintended files or credentials remain ordinary preparation. The
+executing agent may perform them without routine human approval or separate
+manual evidence records. Publication itself requires authorization.
 
 ## Publication Guards
 
-Immediately before publication, the maintainer or release automation must
-fetch the current primary branch and tags from the authoritative remote and
-verify all of the following:
+Automate the checks needed to publish the intended source under a fresh version:
 
-- the version has the required format and is not already published;
-- the current branch is the primary release branch;
-- the worktree and index are clean;
-- the current commit is the recorded, validated candidate;
-- the authoritative remote branch points to that same commit;
-- the matching release note exists in that commit and has the required title
-  and sections;
-- release publication is authorized and the local automated gates succeeded for
-  that commit; and
-- no local or remote tag already uses the selected version.
+- the version has the adopted format and is unused locally and on the
+  authoritative remote;
+- the worktree and index are clean on the primary release branch;
+- the source being published is the exact candidate that passed validation,
+  including its matching release note;
+- the remote primary branch can be advanced to that candidate without
+  discarding remote history, and is published before the tag; and
+- the tag identifies the validated candidate and only the intended refs are
+  published.
 
-Create the version tag against the guarded commit and verify its target before
-publishing it. Publish only the exact intended ref and deliverables. Broad
-operations such as `git push --tags` are discouraged because they can publish
-unreviewed refs unrelated to the release.
+ConfigKit also checks that `origin` has exactly the authoritative fetch and
+push destination, including configured push URLs. The command checks the
+candidate and unused version again after validation, and checks local state
+before creating the tag. Ignored local files do not block publication.
 
-The repository-specific procedure must make these guards executable or give
-copyable commands for performing them.
+Fetch the authoritative branch and tag state as needed for these checks.
+Do not force branch or tag updates to bypass a failed guard. Publish explicit
+refs rather than all local tags. Do not require CI success, publication-service
+availability checks, or a separate manual confirmation for each guard.
 
 ## Immutability And Correction
 
-Published version tags and published deliverables are immutable. Do not move,
-overwrite, recreate, or delete a published tag. Do not replace an artifact,
-image, package, checksum, signature, provenance statement, or release note
-under an already published version.
+Published version tags and published contents are immutable. Do not move,
+overwrite, recreate, or delete a published tag, or replace a published artifact,
+checksum, signature, provenance statement, or release note under that version.
+The checked-in note at the immutable tag is that release's historical record.
 
-If validation fails before publication, correct the candidate, rerun the
-complete gates, and repeat the publication guards. An unpublished local tag
-may be removed after confirming that it was never published or used by a
-release channel.
+If validation fails before publication, correct and commit the candidate and
+rerun the publication command. If a push fails or its outcome is ambiguous,
+inspect the authoritative remote before retrying. Remove an unpublished local
+tag only after confirming it was never published or used by a release channel.
+An unavailable remote leaves publication status unknown; do not overwrite a tag
+to resolve uncertainty.
 
-If publication or post-publication verification reveals a defect, leave the
-published release intact. Correct the defect on the primary branch, choose a
-new patch version or other semantically appropriate new version, write a new
-matching release note, and perform the complete release procedure again.
+Transient network, authentication, CI, or consumer-availability failures do not
+by themselves require a new version.
 
-A distribution channel's supported yank, deprecation, or advisory mechanism
-may warn consumers away from a defective release, but it must not replace that
-release's contents or reuse its version.
+A defect requiring changes to published source or contents requires a corrected
+commit, a new semantically appropriate version, a matching release note, and
+the release procedure again. Leave the original release intact. A channel's
+yank, deprecation, or advisory mechanism may warn consumers away from a defective
+release without replacing its contents or reusing its version.
 
 ## Repository Release Procedure
 
-Every adopting repository must maintain `docs/release.md` as the canonical
-maintainer runbook for implementing this policy. It must define, in execution
-order:
+Maintain `docs/release.md` as a short, executable maintainer runbook. It must
+identify prerequisites, the primary branch and authoritative remote, version
+and note preparation, one publication command with local checks and guards,
+source-only deliverables, the successful-tag-push completion point, and
+partial or unknown-state recovery.
 
-1. maintainer prerequisites and required access;
-2. version selection and compatibility review;
-3. release-note creation;
-4. candidate preparation and commit;
-5. one local validation pass, exact candidate recording, and push;
-6. publication guards;
-7. exact tag and deliverable publication commands;
-8. completion on successful tag push and optional post-publication checks; and
-9. failure handling and correction.
-
-The procedure should use copyable, fail-fast commands where practical. It must
-name the primary branch, authoritative remote, tag form, published
-deliverables, supported build targets, release automation responsibilities,
-and optional consumer verification path. It must link to this policy instead of
-restating or redefining its requirements.
+Use copyable commands where practical. Keep optional diagnostics and consumer
+verification clearly optional. The procedure must not turn preparation work,
+ordinary change review, or post-publication investigation into additional
+release gates.
 
 ## Policy Exceptions
 
-Any exception to this policy must be explicitly documented in this section,
-including the repository constraint requiring it, its rationale, scope, and
-compensating controls. Customizing release mechanics must not silently weaken
-the policy's integrity, validation, documentation, verification, or immutability
-requirements.
-
-For ConfigKit's source-only releases, the maintainer accepts successful publication
-of the intended tag as sufficient completion evidence. This is an explicit
-exception to the shared standard's mandatory post-publication verification:
-authoritative tag read-back and fresh consumer retrieval are optional and
-non-gating. CI status and downstream retrieval availability must not delay release
-completion. Compensating controls are local validation of the exact candidate,
-automated pre-publication guards, matching remote main, verification of the local
-annotated tag target, explicit ref pushes, and immutable published versions.
+The following historical exceptions do not change the current release workflow.
 
 For v0.1.1 only, the maintainer approved renaming the reserved `_configkit` key to
 `configkit` as an error-correcting point release because there are no current
@@ -257,6 +274,3 @@ For v0.2.0 only, the maintainer accepted the successful native macOS check at
 only. The final candidate still requires the complete Linux release checker.
 This exception waives only repeating the macOS check after those documentation
 changes; it does not waive other publication or verification gates.
-
-Candidate selection and guarded publication remain mandatory; post-publication
-verification is optional in the [release procedure](../release.md).

docs/policy/testing.md

@@ -1,14 +1,16 @@
 # Testing Policy
 
-**Base Policy Version:** 1.0
+**Base Policy Version:** 1.3
 
-**Last Updated:** 2026-09-06
+**Last Updated**: 2026-09-28
+
+**Upstream Source:** [Standard Repository Policies](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/policy/src/commit/d84a38ebab26f048cafbe59a2246700c35d29843/docs/policy/testing.md)
 
 ## Purpose
 
 Our tests exist to make **incorrect changes expensive and correct changes cheap**.
 
-We do not optimize for test count, line coverage, exhaustive isolation, or the fewest possible tests. We optimize for sufficient confidence in important behavior while imposing as little unnecessary friction as possible on future development.
+We optimize for sufficient confidence in important behavior while minimizing friction on future development.
 
 ## ConfigKit-specific priorities
 
@@ -44,32 +46,19 @@ policy does not imply that those tools or tests already exist.
 
 ## Every test has a cost
 
-Testing is not an unqualified good. Every test imposes both an immediate cost and a continuing lifetime cost.
-
-A test must be:
-
-- written and reviewed;
-- understood by future maintainers and coding agents;
-- executed in local and CI workflows;
-- diagnosed when it fails;
-- updated when legitimate behavior changes;
-- maintained as fixtures, APIs, and dependencies evolve; and
-- removed or rewritten when it becomes redundant, brittle, misleading, or obsolete.
-
-Tests also create cognitive and architectural friction. They can constrain refactoring, duplicate policy, slow feedback loops, add noise to failures, and cause harmless implementation changes to require unrelated edits across the suite.
+Every test has an immediate and continuing cost: writing, review, execution,
+diagnosis, fixture maintenance, and updates when legitimate behavior changes.
+Tests can also constrain refactoring, duplicate policy, and add failure noise.
 
 A test is warranted only when the confidence it provides justifies these costs.
-
-Apply this cost-benefit analysis at two levels:
+Evaluate that tradeoff at two levels:
 
 1. **Per test:** What realistic defect does this test detect, how consequential would that defect be, and is that protection worth the test's lifetime cost?
 2. **Across the suite:** Does this collection provide materially more confidence than a smaller, simpler suite would?
 
-The preferred test suite is a **lean suite that provides sufficient confidence in the risks that matter, without redundant or low-value tests**. We seek sufficient confidence with the least unnecessary testing friction, not the fewest possible tests.
+Some friction is intentional. Tests should make dangerous changes—such as breaking compatibility, corrupting data, violating security boundaries, or reintroducing subtle bugs—require deliberate review. Keep ordinary internal changes inexpensive.
 
-Some friction is intentional. Tests should make dangerous changes—such as breaking compatibility, corrupting data, violating security boundaries, or reintroducing subtle bugs—require deliberate review. They should not make ordinary internal changes needlessly expensive.
-
-The cost of a test is not a reason to omit testing by default. Do not cite maintenance cost abstractly. When omitting a plausible test, be able to state why the protected failure is low-risk, already covered, obvious, reversible, or cheaper to detect elsewhere. For consequential, subtle, or difficult-to-observe behavior, the presumption should favor testing.
+Evaluate maintenance cost against the specific failure being protected. When omitting a plausible test, be able to state why the protected failure is low-risk, already covered, obvious, reversible, or cheaper to detect elsewhere. For consequential, subtle, or difficult-to-observe behavior, the presumption should favor testing.
 
 ## Default testing style
 
@@ -81,6 +70,8 @@ Use a **classical/Detroit-style** approach:
 - Prefer package-level behavioral tests over tests coupled to private helpers or internal call sequences.
 - Treat exact collaborator interactions as testable behavior only when the interaction itself is a requirement.
 
+Examples of appropriate seams include clocks, randomness, subprocesses, remote APIs, object storage, email, and paid LLM calls.
+
 For ConfigKit, controlled input readers and filesystem failures are useful seams.
 Prefer actual parsing, composition, and decoding over mocks of their call order.
 
@@ -92,7 +83,7 @@ Control clocks, randomness, environment variables, and other process-global or m
 
 ## What deserves tests
 
-Prioritize tests for:
+To the extent the following features are present in the application, prioritize tests for:
 
 1. Public and package-level contracts.
 2. Domain rules and important invariants.
@@ -102,15 +93,27 @@ Prioritize tests for:
 6. Previously observed or plausible regressions.
 7. Representative integration and end-to-end workflows.
 
-A package-level contract is behavior relied upon by another package or major collaborator, not every observable detail of a package implementation.
+A package-level contract comprises behavior relied upon by another package or major collaborator.
 
-For behavior involving **data integrity, destructive operations, compatibility, security, concurrency, idempotency, or recovery**, presume that durable tests are required unless the behavior is already credibly protected at another layer.
+Choose tests for requested behavior and established contracts. Tests must not
+introduce new restrictions, guarantees, or threat scenarios merely because they
+could be asserted. Follow the [agent policy](agents.md) when deciding whether a
+behavior belongs to the contract; current implementation behavior alone is not
+sufficient authority.
+
+For established behavior involving **data integrity, destructive operations,
+compatibility, security, concurrency, idempotency, or recovery**, favor durable
+tests for realistic failures whose consequences warrant protection. Identify
+the failure and the existing contract it would violate. These categories call
+for attention, not an automatic test inventory or permission to strengthen the
+application's guarantees. Account for protection already provided at other layers.
 
 Do not add tests merely because a function, branch, or line exists. Do not add a test when the same meaningful risk is already adequately protected elsewhere.
 
 ## Choose the right test boundary
 
-Test through the narrowest stable boundary that expresses the behavior clearly.
+Choose the narrowest stable boundary that expresses the behavior clearly and
+provides durable confidence with minimal incidental coupling.
 
 This is often the package API, but it may instead be:
 
@@ -118,28 +121,15 @@ This is often the package API, but it may instead be:
 - a package-level operation when several internal collaborators jointly produce the behavior; or
 - a larger integration boundary when correctness emerges from interaction with a real dependency.
 
-Do not force all behavior through oversized end-to-end tests. Do not test every private helper merely because it exists. Choose the boundary that gives durable confidence with the least incidental coupling.
-
 ## Test behavior, not implementation
 
-A test should protect a decision, contract, or invariant—not memorialize the current implementation.
+A test should protect a selected decision, contract, or invariant.
 
-Before adding or retaining a test, ask:
+A test is suspect when it primarily detects changes to private constants or
+helpers, equivalent operation ordering, incidental formatting, equivalent
+algorithms, or internal structure that preserves behavior.
 
-> What realistic defect would this test catch?
-
-A test is suspect when its main purpose is to detect that someone:
-
-- changed an internal constant;
-- renamed or split a private helper;
-- reordered equivalent internal operations;
-- changed incidental formatting;
-- replaced one correct algorithm with another; or
-- refactored internal object structure without changing behavior.
-
-Refactoring should normally require no test edits unless the refactored structure is itself part of the contract.
-
-A test can be factually correct and still have negative value. Accurately describing current behavior is not enough; the protected behavior must be important enough to justify the future friction.
+Behavioral tests should normally remain stable through internal refactoring that preserves the contract.
 
 ## Expected effects of different changes
 
@@ -156,12 +146,13 @@ A test failing is not the same as a test needing to be edited. Many tests may co
 
 ## Separate mechanism from policy
 
-Configurable thresholds and defaults must not be duplicated throughout the test suite.
+Derive expectations from test-controlled configuration and relationships.
 
-For example, do not encode an internal concurrency limit indirectly:
+For this example, assume the selected contract rejects a request to start more
+processes than a configured limit. Do not encode its production default indirectly:
 
 ```go
-// Production policy:
+// Production default:
 const maxConcurrency = 4
 
 // Brittle test:
@@ -179,25 +170,30 @@ require.NoError(t, runner.Start(limit))
 require.ErrorIs(t, runner.Start(limit+1), ErrTooMuchConcurrency)
 ```
 
-The test should prove:
+For this selected contract, the test should prove:
 
 - the configured limit is accepted; and
 - one beyond the configured limit is rejected.
 
+Rejection is not a general requirement for concurrency control. If the selected
+contract queues excess work or limits active workers while accepting larger
+batches, test that behavior instead. Do not add rejection or a configurable
+limit solely to reproduce this example.
+
 The production default should be tested exactly only when its literal value is itself a public, operational, safety, protocol, or compatibility requirement.
 
-Apply the same rule to limits, timeouts, capacities, retry counts, and ranges: test relationships and behavior, not duplicated literals.
+Apply the same rule to limits, timeouts, capacities, retry counts, and ranges: test relationships and behavior.
 
-For concurrency limits, test both kinds of behavior when relevant:
+For established concurrency limits, distinguish these behaviors where the contract requires them:
 
-1. **Configuration enforcement:** invalid or excessive requested values are handled correctly.
+1. **Configuration handling:** values are accepted or rejected according to the selected contract.
 2. **Runtime enforcement:** observed peak concurrency never exceeds the configured limit.
 
-Use a test-controlled limit and measure the behavior relative to that limit. Do not merely assert today's default value.
+Use a test-controlled limit and measure the behavior relative to that limit.
 
-## Avoid semantic duplication across layers
+## Assign each behavior a test owner
 
-Each behavior should have a clear test owner.
+For ConfigKit, assign ownership as follows:
 
 - YAML boundary tests own syntax and policy enforcement.
 - Composition and overlay tests own their operation semantics.
@@ -209,9 +205,7 @@ Each behavior should have a clear test owner.
 
 These are responsibility boundaries, not a required package layout.
 
-Higher-level tests should not repeat every lower-level case. A single intentional policy change should not require unrelated edits across many test files.
-
-Tests that are individually reasonable may still be collectively redundant. Evaluate the marginal value of each additional test in light of the protection already provided by the rest of the suite.
+Give each layer its distinct responsibility and keep expectation updates localized to the contract being changed.
 
 ## Use test doubles deliberately
 
@@ -232,104 +226,77 @@ Mocks are appropriate when the contract includes facts such as:
 - an expensive API is called no more than once; or
 - a security audit event is emitted.
 
-Do not use mocks merely to isolate every object or reproduce the implementation's call graph.
-
 ## Go-specific guidance
 
-Use:
+Select techniques by behavior and risk:
 
 - table-driven tests for meaningful behavioral categories and boundaries;
 - `t.TempDir()` for real filesystem behavior;
-- fuzz tests for parsers, normalization, path handling, and broad input spaces;
+- `httptest.Server` for realistic HTTP interactions;
+- fuzz tests when exploring broad input spaces, such as parsers or path handling, adds useful protection beyond representative cases;
 - golden files only when the complete output is intentionally stable;
 - integration tests where correctness depends on component interaction; and
-- a small number of representative end-to-end tests.
+- a small number of representative end-to-end tests when assembled workflows expose meaningful risks not adequately covered at narrower boundaries.
 
-Avoid exact error-string assertions unless the wording is itself contractual. Prefer `errors.Is`, `errors.As`, typed errors, or structured error fields.
+Prefer `errors.Is`, `errors.As`, typed errors, or structured error fields. Use exact error-wording assertions only when the wording is contractual.
 
 At the public library boundary, prefer diagnostic codes, paths, and source
 locations over complete message snapshots. Assert wording only when contractual.
 
 Golden-file updates must require an explicit local flag. CI must not update golden files automatically, and reviewers must inspect the semantic diff before accepting an update.
 
-Keep tests readable and direct. Test helpers and fixture frameworks must earn their own maintenance cost; do not build elaborate test infrastructure for small or isolated needs.
+Keep tests readable and direct. Size test helpers and fixture frameworks to the maintenance benefit they provide.
 
 ## Coverage
 
-Coverage is a diagnostic, not a target.
+Use coverage to locate untested critical branches and unexpectedly weak packages. Evaluate test quality through meaningful behavioral protection and choose coverage according to risk.
 
-Use it to find untested critical branches and unexpectedly weak packages. Do not write low-value tests solely to increase a percentage, and do not infer test quality from coverage alone.
-
-Dense configuration semantics will often warrant higher coverage than simple input wiring. Uneven coverage is acceptable when it reflects risk.
-
-Increasing coverage is valuable only when the newly covered behavior protects a meaningful risk at an acceptable cost.
+Pure domain logic will often warrant higher coverage than CLI wiring or external adapters. Uneven coverage is acceptable when it reflects risk.
 
 ## Regression tests
 
 A bug fix should normally include a regression test that fails before the fix and passes afterward.
 
-Retain the test when the defect could realistically recur and its consequences justify the ongoing cost. Prefer the narrowest durable test of the violated contract or invariant; do not preserve accidental implementation details from the original bug.
+Retain the test when the defect could realistically recur and its consequences justify the ongoing cost. Prefer the narrowest durable test of the violated contract or invariant.
 
-Not every historical bug requires a permanent test. If the underlying design has made recurrence impossible, the test has become redundant, or a stronger invariant test now subsumes it, remove or consolidate it.
+Remove or consolidate a test when the underlying design has made recurrence impossible, its protection is redundant, or a stronger invariant test subsumes it.
 
 ## Deleting or rewriting tests
 
-Tests are maintained code, not permanent historical artifacts.
-
-Delete or rewrite a test when its maintenance cost exceeds the confidence it provides.
+Delete or rewrite tests when maintenance cost exceeds their continuing
+protective value.
 
 Strong candidates include tests that:
 
 - require updates after harmless internal changes;
-- directly assert private constants without protecting a real contract;
-- duplicate the same policy across several layers;
+- assert incidental private constants or snapshot large amounts of incidental output;
 - verify mock choreography rather than outcomes;
-- snapshot large amounts of incidental output;
-- test trivial private helpers already exercised through stable package behavior;
-- protect risks already covered more effectively elsewhere;
+- duplicate policy across layers, retest trivial helpers covered by package
+  behavior, or protect risks covered more effectively elsewhere;
 - are flaky, misleading, obsolete, or disproportionately expensive to diagnose; or
 - no longer correspond to a plausible failure mode.
 
-Several brittle tests may encode one genuine requirement. Replace them with one durable behavior-level or invariant test rather than preserving all of them.
-
-Deleting a low-value test can improve the quality of the suite by reducing noise, maintenance burden, and friction around legitimate change.
+Several brittle tests may encode one genuine requirement. Consolidate them into one durable behavior-level or invariant test.
 
 ## Reviewing a proposed test
 
-Use the following questions when the value, boundary, or durability of a proposed test is not self-evident. Significant test additions should be reviewable against them, but written answers are not required for every routine test.
+Use the following questions when a proposed test needs closer evaluation. Significant test additions should be reviewable against them; written answers are optional for routine tests.
 
-1. What realistic defect would it catch?
-2. How likely is that defect?
-3. How consequential would it be?
-4. Is the behavior already protected elsewhere?
-5. At which layer should this behavior be owned?
-6. Does the test assert a durable contract or an incidental implementation detail?
-7. Could the implementation be refactored without changing the behavior and without editing this test?
-8. What should cause this test to fail?
-9. What legitimate changes should not cause this test to fail?
-10. What ongoing maintenance, execution, and diagnostic cost will the test impose?
-11. Is there a smaller or more direct test that protects the same risk?
-
-Do not add the test when its expected lifetime cost exceeds its expected protective value.
-
-When deciding not to test plausible behavior, record or be able to explain why the risk is low, already protected, obvious, reversible, or cheaper to detect elsewhere.
+1. Which requested behavior or established contract does it protect, and what realistic defect would violate it?
+2. How likely and consequential is that defect, and is it already protected elsewhere?
+3. What is the narrowest stable boundary that can test it clearly?
+4. Would a correct internal refactor or a change to an incidental default require test edits?
+5. Does its confidence justify its maintenance, execution, and diagnostic cost, or would a smaller test suffice?
 
 ## Definition of sufficient
 
 A test suite is sufficient when:
 
-- important contracts and invariants are protected;
-- meaningful boundaries and failure modes are exercised;
-- realistic and consequential regressions are credibly protected against silent recurrence;
-- behavior involving data integrity, destructive operations, compatibility, security, concurrency, idempotency, and recovery is credibly protected;
-- important external boundaries have realistic integration coverage;
-- representative complete workflows are tested;
-- failures provide useful signal rather than redundant noise;
-- legitimate internal changes usually do not require test edits; and
+- important requested behavior and established contracts are protected against realistic, consequential failures;
+- boundaries and component interactions have coverage where they introduce meaningful risks not protected elsewhere;
+- failures provide useful, distinct signals;
+- tests usually remain stable through legitimate internal changes; and
 - additional tests would mostly repeat existing protection or preserve inconsequential implementation details.
 
-Sufficiency is a risk judgment, not a coverage percentage or test count. Reassess it as the library, its consumers, and the consequences of failure evolve.
-
-The governing rule is:
-
-> Test heavily where failure is consequential, subtle, or difficult to detect after the fact. Test lightly where failure is obvious, reversible, and inexpensive—and retain no test whose lifetime cost exceeds the confidence it provides.
+Reassess sufficiency as the application, its users, and the consequences of
+failure evolve.

docs/release.md

@@ -1,38 +1,34 @@
 # ConfigKit Release Procedure
 
 This is the maintainer runbook for ConfigKit's [release policy](policy/release.md).
-ConfigKit publishes one source-only Go module: the immutable source tag and the
-matching checked-in release note are the deliverables. There is no application
-binary, container image, generated package, or separate registry publication.
+ConfigKit publishes one source-only Go module. The immutable annotated tag and
+matching checked-in release note are the deliverables; there is no binary,
+container image, generated package, or separate registry publication.
 
 ## Release identity and support
 
 - Module: `gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit`
 - Primary branch: `main`
-- Authoritative remote: `origin`, expected to fetch from
+- Authoritative remote: `origin`, with fetch and push destination
   `https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit.git`
-- Tags: stable Semantic Versions such as `v0.1.0`; prerelease tags are not supported
-- Minimum Go language/toolchain line: Go 1.25, release-validated with one maintained
-  patch of that line; newer-toolchain testing is optional and non-gating
-- Release-gated build targets: Linux on amd64 and arm64
-- Best-effort targets: macOS on amd64 and arm64, under the
+- Tags: stable Semantic Versions such as `v0.5.0`; no prereleases
+- Minimum Go line: Go 1.25, validated with one maintained patch
+- Release-gated targets: Linux amd64 and arm64
+- Best-effort targets: macOS amd64 and arm64, under the
   [platform support policy](policy/release.md#platform-support)
 
-The local Linux checker includes native race tests and CGO-disabled cross-builds.
-Its output reports skipped filesystem cases; no separate evidence record or
-human sign-off is required. Native macOS checks and Darwin cross-builds are
-optional and do not gate publication.
-
-CI is never a release gate. Do not wait for it, poll its status, or delay reporting
-completion because it is pending, unavailable, or failed.
+The checker runs one offline race suite, one full vet pass, and CGO-disabled
+builds for both Linux targets. It reports skipped filesystem cases. macOS checks
+and newer-toolchain tests are optional. CI is never a readiness or completion
+gate; do not wait for or poll it.
 
 ## 1. Prepare access and tools
 
-The release maintainer owns this procedure. Use a clean checkout (a dedicated clone is optional) with Git, Bash 3.2 or newer,
-a maintained Go 1.25 patch, and the compiler needed for native race tests. The checker supports the stock macOS
-Bash; its filename enumeration is null-delimited, including names with whitespace. Configure private-host Git and Go module
-access through the normal credential manager before starting. Keep tokens, passwords,
-SSH material, and environment dumps outside the repository and command transcript.
+Use a clean checkout with Git, Bash 3.2 or newer, a maintained Go 1.25 patch,
+and a native compiler for race tests. Configure private-host access through the
+normal credential manager. Keep credentials and environment dumps outside the
+repository and command transcript.
+
 Verify access without displaying credentials:
 
 ```sh
@@ -40,9 +36,9 @@ git remote get-url origin
 git ls-remote origin HEAD
 ```
 
-The remote URL must equal the authoritative URL above. Acquire the selected
-toolchain and dependencies explicitly. For example, with the maintained patch
-used when this procedure was simplified:
+The fetch URL and all configured push destinations must resolve to the
+authoritative URL above. The publication command checks this again. Acquire the
+selected toolchain and dependencies explicitly before offline validation:
 
 ```sh
 export CONFIGKIT_BASELINE_TOOLCHAIN=go1.25.14
@@ -50,188 +46,154 @@ GOTOOLCHAIN="$CONFIGKIT_BASELINE_TOOLCHAIN" go version
 GOTOOLCHAIN="$CONFIGKIT_BASELINE_TOOLCHAIN" go mod download
 ```
 
-Keep toolchains maintained, but do not require latest-version discovery for each
-release. The checker sets `GOPROXY=off` and fails if the cache is incomplete.
-Toolchain and YAML-dependency update research belongs to periodic maintenance or
-relevant dependency changes. No renewed approval of an unchanged pin is required.
-
-Use Bash with `set -euo pipefail` for the command blocks below so any failed gate
-stops the sequence. Publication requires user authorization; the agent policy's
-local-commit authorization is not permission to push or release.
+A maintained patch may replace the example pin. No per-release latest-version
+survey is required. Dependencies must be cached; the checker sets `GOPROXY=off`.
+Publication requires user authorization. Standing authorization for local
+commits does not authorize a push or release.
 
 ## 2. Select the version and review compatibility
 
-Choose an unused stable version and compare the candidate with the previous tag.
-For the first release, review the whole public surface and current contracts.
+Choose an unused stable version. Compare the candidate with the previous tag.
+Review exported Go signatures and ownership, YAML and scalar semantics,
+precedence, diagnostic codes, minimum Go version, and platform support. A
+signature-preserving change may still affect consumers. Before `v1.0.0`,
+intentional incompatible minor-release changes need a note explaining impact
+and consumer action; patch releases remain compatible within their minor line.
+Review the maintained consumer examples and migration guide.
+
+When dependencies change, review parser behavior and migration impact as part
+of that change. Module tidiness belongs to dependency-change review, not the
+release checker. Do not repeat a dependency-version survey for every release.
+
+## 3. Write and commit the release note
+
+Create `docs/releases/<version>.md` for the selected version. Its first line
+must be `# ConfigKit <version>`. Give a meaningful summary and include
+compatibility impact or upgrade instructions when applicable. Link to current
+contracts for exact behavior. Review the note and affected canonical documents
+as ordinary preparation, then commit the complete candidate.
+
+End every new note with these links, replacing `VERSION` with the complete tag:
+
+```markdown
+[COPYRIGHT](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/VERSION/COPYRIGHT) | [LICENSE](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/VERSION/LICENSE) | [ATTRIBUTION](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/VERSION/docs/oss/attribution.md)
+```
+
+Confirm the three target files exist in the candidate and review the version in
+the URLs. The future tag need not resolve remotely yet; this review adds no
+network gate. ConfigKit uses checked-in notes without hosted release objects.
+If a hosted page is used later, reuse the note and preserve its footer. Do not
+rewrite historical notes or add downloadable license assets.
+
+## 4. Publish the committed candidate
+
+Before publication, review compatibility, release-note accuracy, and the file
+list for unintended content or credentials. Retire completed roadmaps as part of
+release preparation, preserving unfinished and deferred work and repairing
+links. These are ordinary preparation tasks, not separate human sign-offs.
+
+With the release explicitly authorized, run the one publication command.
+The script resolves the repository root from its own path, so it may be invoked
+from another directory by using its path there. Replace the sample version with
+the selected version:
 
 ```sh
-release_version=v0.1.0
-printf '%s\n' "$release_version" | grep -Eq '^v(0|[1-9][0-9]*)\.(0|[1-9][0-9]*)\.(0|[1-9][0-9]*)$'
-if git show-ref --verify --quiet "refs/tags/$release_version"; then exit 1; fi
-if git ls-remote --exit-code --tags origin "refs/tags/$release_version" >/dev/null; then
-  printf 'remote tag already exists: %s\n' "$release_version" >&2
-  exit 1
+./scripts/release.sh v0.5.0
+```
+
+The command requires `main`, a clean index/worktree, an unused version locally
+and on the authoritative remote, and a matching note in the captured commit.
+Ignored local files do not block it. It checks remote ancestry, runs
+[`release-check.sh`](../scripts/release-check.sh) once against that commit,
+rechecks candidate and version state, pushes only that commit to `main`, then
+creates and pushes one annotated tag. The tag message is the checked-in note.
+It never commits or repairs the checkout.
+
+A successful intended tag push completes publication. The command reports the
+version and commit immediately. No CI, module retrieval, remote read-back, or
+hosted release object is required. The checker may be run separately for
+diagnosis, but it is not a prerequisite: a fresh publication invocation
+validates its candidate once.
+
+## 5. Recover from a failed or uncertain push
+
+The command performs one bounded authoritative-state check after a failed push.
+If the main push failed but authoritative main equals the candidate, it proceeds.
+If the tag push failed but its exact tag object reached the remote, it reports
+success. Otherwise it reports branch-only, conflicting, or unknown state and
+retains any local tag.
+
+Inspect exact refs before any retry. Set `release_version` to the attempted
+version and compare main with the candidate from the command's report:
+
+```sh
+release_version=v0.5.0
+authoritative=https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit.git
+if remote_main=$(git ls-remote --refs --exit-code "$authoritative" refs/heads/main); then
+  printf 'remote main: %s\n' "$remote_main"
 else
-  test $? -eq 2
+  result=$?
+  if [ "$result" -eq 2 ]; then
+    printf 'authoritative main confirmed absent\n' >&2
+  else
+    printf 'remote main state unknown; inspect before retrying\n' >&2
+  fi
 fi
-git log --oneline --decorate --no-merges
-```
-
-Review exported Go signatures and ownership, YAML and scalar behavior, precedence,
-diagnostic codes, minimum Go version, and platform support. Before `v1.0.0`, any
-intentional incompatible minor-release change must be explained with consumer action;
-patch releases must remain compatible within their minor line. Review the maintained
-consumer examples and the migration guide even when signatures did not change.
-
-When dependencies change, review parser behavior and migration impact as part of
-that change. Keep Compatibility accurate about the dependency pin, but do not
-perform an external version survey for every patch release.
-
-## 3. Write the release note
-
-Create `docs/releases/$release_version.md` before selecting the candidate. It must
-begin with `# ConfigKit $release_version` and contain `Summary`, `Compatibility`,
-`Upgrade`, and `Changes` sections. Use “No action required” where appropriate. Link
-to current canonical contracts instead of copying their definitions. Do not create a
-release note until there is a real candidate and reviewed content.
-
-## 4. Validate the source candidate
-
-Before release validation, finish compatibility review, inspect the diff and file
-list for unintended content or credentials, retire completed roadmaps, repair
-links, and review the release note. These are ordinary preparation tasks the
-executing agent may perform, not separate human approvals or evidence records.
-Ask the maintainer only for an unresolved product decision or missing authority.
-
-Commit the candidate, staging only its intended changes, then run the checker
-once against that clean commit. Do not run both everyday and release checkers to
-repeat the same gates.
-
-```sh
-git status --short
-# Stage the specific files belonging to the candidate, then review:
-git diff --staged
-git commit --message "Prepare ConfigKit $release_version"
-test -z "$(git status --porcelain=v1 --untracked-files=all)"
-candidate_commit=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
-./scripts/release-check.sh
-test "$(git rev-parse HEAD)" = "$candidate_commit"
-test -z "$(git status --porcelain=v1 --untracked-files=all)"
-printf '%s\n' "$candidate_commit" > "$(git rev-parse --git-path configkit-release-candidate)"
-```
-
-If the final candidate is already committed, omit the staging and commit commands;
-do not create an empty commit. The checker validates module manifests in a
-disposable copy, formatting, whitespace, the full offline suite once with the race
-detector and verbose skip reporting, vet once, and CGO-disabled Linux amd64/arm64
-builds. The suite includes examples, consumer fixtures, documentation links, and
-package boundaries; no separate reruns are required. No additional linter is
-claimed. Sibling-consumer links are checked when those checkouts exist and are
-otherwise inapplicable in an isolated checkout.
-
-A changed candidate requires validation again. Do not reuse a recorded candidate
-from an older revision. The record is written only after successful local checks.
-
-## 5. Prepare publication
-
-The following guarded sequence pushes only `main` and the selected tag. Local
-validation failures block it; CI does not. Keep the selected `release_version`
-from step 2 in the same shell. If starting a new shell, set it explicitly again.
-
-## 6. Run publication guards
-
-Immediately before tagging, fetch the authoritative branch and tags, restore the
-recorded variables if this is a new shell, and execute every guard:
-
-```sh
-candidate_commit=$(cat "$(git rev-parse --git-path configkit-release-candidate)")
-git fetch --prune origin main
-git fetch --tags origin
-test "$(git branch --show-current)" = main
-test -z "$(git status --porcelain=v1 --untracked-files=all)"
-test "$(git rev-parse HEAD)" = "$candidate_commit"
-test "$(git remote get-url origin)" = 'https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit.git'
-printf '%s\n' "$release_version" | grep -Eq '^v(0|[1-9][0-9]*)\.(0|[1-9][0-9]*)\.(0|[1-9][0-9]*)$'
-test -f "docs/releases/$release_version.md"
-test "$(sed -n '1p' "docs/releases/$release_version.md")" = "# ConfigKit $release_version"
-for heading in Summary Compatibility Upgrade Changes; do
-  grep -Fxq "## $heading" "docs/releases/$release_version.md"
-done
-if git show-ref --verify --quiet "refs/tags/$release_version"; then exit 1; fi
-if git ls-remote --exit-code --tags origin "refs/tags/$release_version" >/dev/null; then
-  printf 'remote tag already exists: %s\n' "$release_version" >&2
-  exit 1
+ref="refs/tags/$release_version"
+if remote_tag=$(git ls-remote --refs --exit-code "$authoritative" "$ref"); then
+  printf 'remote tag: %s\n' "$remote_tag"
 else
-  test $? -eq 2
+  result=$?
+  if [ "$result" -eq 2 ]; then
+    printf 'remote tag confirmed absent\n'
+  else
+    printf 'remote tag state unknown; do not reuse the version\n' >&2
+  fi
+fi
+if local_tag=$(git rev-parse --verify "refs/tags/$release_version" 2>/dev/null); then
+  printf 'local tag object: %s\n' "$local_tag"
+else
+  printf 'no local tag object\n'
 fi
-git push origin HEAD:refs/heads/main
-git fetch origin main
-test "$(git rev-parse refs/remotes/origin/main)" = "$candidate_commit"
-test "$(git rev-parse HEAD)" = "$candidate_commit"
-test -z "$(git status --porcelain=v1 --untracked-files=all)"
 ```
 
-The recorded local validation must apply to exactly `$candidate_commit`. No
-separate human sign-off, CI status, or manual evidence document is required.
-
-## 7. Tag and publish the exact ref
-
-Create one annotated tag at the guarded commit, verify its peeled target, and push
-only that ref. Do not use `git push --tags`.
+A query failure is not proof that the tag is absent. Compare the remote tag
+object ID with the local annotated tag object ID; its peeled commit alone is
+insufficient to establish identical publication. A conflicting published tag
+must not be moved or replaced. If remote main advanced but the tag was not
+published, report that partial progress. Only after confirming the local tag
+was never published or used by another channel may a maintainer remove it:
 
 ```sh
-git tag --annotate "$release_version" --message "ConfigKit $release_version" "$candidate_commit"
-test "$(git rev-list -n 1 "$release_version")" = "$candidate_commit"
-git push origin "refs/tags/$release_version:refs/tags/$release_version"
+git tag -d "$release_version"
 ```
 
-A successful push of the intended tag completes the release. Report success now;
-do not wait for CI, module propagation, or any post-publication check. No Gitea
-release object or binary upload is required.
+A subsequent invocation revalidates the candidate; a correctly published tag
+needs no rerun. Do not roll back main or automatically delete a tag. Transport
+or authentication failure alone does not require a new version. A defect in
+published source requires a corrected commit, a new semantically appropriate
+version and note, and the release procedure again.
 
-## 8. Optional post-publication checks
+## 6. Optional consumer verification
 
 Only when useful or requested, read back the remote tag or retrieve the exact
-version into a new module without a local `replace` directive. These checks are
-optional and non-gating; their failure or unavailability does not delay release
-completion. Do not poll CI or wait for module propagation. Private-host credentials
-must already be configured. Example direct-origin verification:
+version into a new module without a local `replace` directive. These checks
+are optional and non-gating. Do not poll CI or wait for module propagation.
+Private-host credentials must already be configured. For direct-origin
+verification, set the version to the release just published (replace the sample
+below), then use a temporary consumer module and check the exact module path
+and version reported by `go list -m`:
 
 ```sh
-remote_tag_commit=$(git ls-remote origin "refs/tags/$release_version^{}" | awk '{print $1}')
-test "$remote_tag_commit" = "$candidate_commit"
+release_version=v0.5.0
 consumer_dir=$(mktemp -d)
 (
   cd "$consumer_dir"
   go mod init example.invalid/configkit-release-check
   GOPRIVATE=gitea.maximumdirect.net GOPROXY=direct go get "gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit@$release_version"
-  cat > main.go <<'EOF'
-package main
-
-import configkit "gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit"
-
-func main() {
-        _ = configkit.NoSource()
-}
-EOF
-  gofmt -w main.go
-  go test ./...
-  go build ./...
   go list -m -f '{{.Path}} {{.Version}}' gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit
 )
-rm -rf -- "$consumer_dir"
 ```
 
-If performed, the final `go list` output should show the exact module path and
-`$release_version`. Report optional verification separately from publication success.
-
-## 9. Handle failures without replacement
-
-Before publication, fix and commit the candidate, validate it, record the new
-exact candidate, and repeat the guarded publication sequence. An unpublished local tag may be deleted only after verifying it
-was never pushed or used by another release channel.
-
-After publication, never move, delete, or recreate the tag and never replace its
-release note. Correct the defect on `main`, choose a new semantically appropriate
-version, and repeat this procedure. A supported advisory or deprecation mechanism
-may warn consumers about the old version but cannot change its contents.
+The output should show the exact module path and selected version. Report this
+optional check separately from publication success.

docs/releases/v0.4.1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+# ConfigKit v0.4.1
+
+This release formalizes ConfigKit's licensing and upstream attribution
+documentation without changing library behavior.
+
+## Summary
+
+ConfigKit now includes an explicit LGPL-3.0-or-later grant in COPYRIGHT,
+complete LGPLv3 and incorporated GPLv3 license texts, and centralized upstream
+attribution. README and release guidance provide navigation to those materials.
+
+## Compatibility
+
+No Go code, public API, configuration semantics, diagnostic behavior, or
+dependencies changed from v0.4.0. The minimum Go version remains 1.25, Linux
+remains release-validated, and macOS remains best-effort. The YAML dependency
+remains `go.yaml.in/yaml/v4 v4.0.0-rc.6`.
+
+The project grant is explicitly LGPL-3.0-or-later. Third-party material remains
+subject to its respective terms, recorded in the attribution document below.
+Published earlier releases are unchanged.
+
+## Upgrade
+
+Update the module dependency and rebuild to select this release:
+
+```sh
+go get gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit@v0.4.1
+```
+
+No application-code or configuration migration is required from v0.4.0.
+
+## Changes
+
+- Add the project COPYRIGHT statement and complete standard project license texts.
+- Document go-yaml attribution with exact upstream revision links and local
+  Apache-2.0 and MIT license texts.
+- Adopt the house OSS policy and connect licensing ownership and contributor guidance.
+- Add license and attribution navigation to README and future release documents,
+  without adding release gates or changing publication mechanics.
+
+[COPYRIGHT](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/v0.4.1/COPYRIGHT) | [LICENSE](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/v0.4.1/LICENSE) | [ATTRIBUTION](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/v0.4.1/docs/oss/attribution.md)

docs/releases/v0.4.2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+# ConfigKit v0.4.2
+
+This patch release simplifies and safeguards source publication and aligns
+maintainer policy and licensing guidance. Library behavior is unchanged.
+
+## Summary
+
+Maintainers can now publish a prepared release with one guarded command. It
+validates the exact committed candidate, checks the authoritative destination,
+and pushes only the candidate on `main` and its annotated version tag. The
+[release procedure](../release.md) explains preparation and partial-publication
+recovery; successful tag publication completes the source-only release without
+waiting for CI or consumer retrieval.
+
+## Compatibility
+
+No Go code, public API, configuration semantics, diagnostic behavior, or
+dependencies changed from v0.4.1. The minimum Go version remains 1.25. Linux
+amd64 and arm64 remain release-validated; macOS remains best-effort. The YAML
+dependency remains `go.yaml.in/yaml/v4 v4.0.0-rc.6`.
+
+## Upgrade
+
+Select this version and rebuild:
+
+```sh
+go get gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit@v0.4.2
+```
+
+No application-code or configuration migration is required from v0.4.1.
+
+## Changes
+
+- Add guarded single-command publication with exact candidate, version, and
+  remote checks; note-derived annotated tags; and bounded failed-push recovery.
+- Keep one offline race suite, one full vet pass, and Linux amd64/arm64 builds
+  as release gates. Formatting and whitespace remain development checks;
+  dependency tidiness is reviewed when dependencies change.
+- Align adopted policies and contributor guidance with their pinned upstream
+  revision, and include the CC BY-SA 4.0 license text and attribution for
+  adapted policy material. The project grant remains LGPL-3.0-or-later.
+- Retire completed release-workflow and policy-alignment planning records while
+  preserving their history in Git. Deferred scope remains documented.
+
+[COPYRIGHT](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/v0.4.2/COPYRIGHT) | [LICENSE](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/v0.4.2/LICENSE) | [ATTRIBUTION](https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit/src/tag/v0.4.2/docs/oss/attribution.md)

release_check_test.go

@@ -9,122 +9,8 @@ import (
 	"testing"
 )
 
-// Exercise the copyable runbook against disposable Git repositories, not a
-// publication service. The checker itself is covered separately.
-func TestReleaseRunbookGuards(t *testing.T) {
-	document, err := os.ReadFile("docs/release.md")
-	if err != nil {
-		t.Fatal(err)
-	}
-	block := func(heading string) string {
-		t.Helper()
-		_, section, ok := strings.Cut(string(document), heading)
-		if !ok {
-			t.Fatalf("missing section %q", heading)
-		}
-		_, section, ok = strings.Cut(section, "```sh\n")
-		if !ok {
-			t.Fatalf("missing commands in %q", heading)
-		}
-		commands, _, ok := strings.Cut(section, "```")
-		if !ok {
-			t.Fatalf("unterminated commands in %q", heading)
-		}
-		return commands
-	}
-	prepare := block("## 4. Validate the source candidate")
-	publish := block("## 6. Run publication guards") + block("## 7. Tag and publish the exact ref")
-	for _, scenario := range []string{"success", "dirty", "changed-candidate", "remote-tag-exists", "failed-validation"} {
-		t.Run(scenario, func(t *testing.T) {
-			root := t.TempDir()
-			remote := filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), "remote.git")
-			run := func(program string, args ...string) string {
-				t.Helper()
-				cmd := exec.Command(program, args...)
-				cmd.Dir = root
-				out, err := cmd.CombinedOutput()
-				if err != nil {
-					t.Fatalf("%s %v: %v\n%s", program, args, err, out)
-				}
-				return strings.TrimSpace(string(out))
-			}
-			run("git", "init", "-q", "-b", "main")
-			run("git", "init", "-q", "--bare", remote)
-			run("git", "config", "user.name", "Test")
-			run("git", "config", "user.email", "test@example.invalid")
-			run("git", "config", "commit.gpgsign", "false")
-			run("git", "config", "tag.gpgsign", "false")
-			const origin = "https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit.git"
-			run("git", "remote", "add", "origin", remote)
-			// Substitute only the fixture's authoritative URL; execute the guards
-			// themselves unchanged. Disallow network transports as a backstop.
-			localPublish := strings.ReplaceAll(publish, origin, remote)
-			for _, dir := range []string{"docs/releases", "scripts"} {
-				if err := os.MkdirAll(filepath.Join(root, dir), 0700); err != nil {
-					t.Fatal(err)
-				}
-			}
-			write := func(path, content string) {
-				t.Helper()
-				if err := os.WriteFile(filepath.Join(root, path), []byte(content), 0700); err != nil {
-					t.Fatal(err)
-				}
-			}
-			checker := "#!/bin/sh\nexit 0\n"
-			if scenario == "failed-validation" {
-				checker = "#!/bin/sh\nexit 37\n"
-			}
-			write("scripts/release-check.sh", checker)
-			write("docs/releases/v0.9.0.md", "# ConfigKit v0.9.0\n\n## Summary\n\n## Compatibility\n\n## Upgrade\n\n## Changes\n")
-			run("git", "add", ".")
-			bash := func(commands string) ([]byte, error) {
-				cmd := exec.Command("bash", "-c", "set -euo pipefail\nrelease_version=v0.9.0\n"+commands)
-				cmd.Dir = root
-				cmd.Env = append(os.Environ(), "GIT_ALLOW_PROTOCOL=file")
-				return cmd.CombinedOutput()
-			}
-			out, err := bash(prepare)
-			if scenario == "failed-validation" {
-				if err == nil {
-					t.Fatal("failed validation accepted")
-				}
-				if _, err := os.Stat(filepath.Join(root, ".git/configkit-release-candidate")); !os.IsNotExist(err) {
-					t.Fatal("failed validation recorded a candidate")
-				}
-			} else if err != nil {
-				t.Fatalf("prepare: %v\n%s", err, out)
-			}
-			switch scenario {
-			case "dirty":
-				write("unexpected.txt", "uncommitted\n")
-			case "changed-candidate":
-				run("git", "commit", "--allow-empty", "-qm", "Changed candidate")
-			case "remote-tag-exists":
-				run("git", "tag", "v0.9.0")
-				run("git", "push", remote, "refs/tags/v0.9.0")
-				run("git", "tag", "-d", "v0.9.0")
-			}
-			// Seed the remote primary branch so fetch works before first publication.
-			run("git", "push", remote, "HEAD:refs/heads/main")
-			out, err = bash(localPublish)
-			if scenario == "success" {
-				if err != nil {
-					t.Fatalf("publish: %v\n%s", err, out)
-				}
-				if got := run("git", "--git-dir="+remote, "rev-parse", "v0.9.0^{}"); got != run("git", "rev-parse", "HEAD") {
-					t.Fatal("published wrong commit")
-				}
-			} else if err == nil {
-				t.Fatalf("publication accepted %s", scenario)
-			} else if scenario != "remote-tag-exists" && run("git", "--git-dir="+remote, "tag", "--list") != "" {
-				t.Fatal("failed guard published a tag")
-			}
-		})
-	}
-}
-
-func TestCheckScriptsHandleFilenamesAndStopOnFailure(t *testing.T) {
-	for _, scriptName := range []string{"release-check.sh", "check.sh"} {
+func TestDevelopmentCheckHandlesFilenamesAndStopsOnFailure(t *testing.T) {
+	for _, scriptName := range []string{"check.sh"} {
 		t.Run(scriptName, func(t *testing.T) {
 			script, err := os.ReadFile("scripts/" + scriptName)
 			if err != nil {
@@ -217,25 +103,95 @@ func TestCheckScriptsHandleFilenamesAndStopOnFailure(t *testing.T) {
 					if fail && strings.Contains(string(invoked), "vet ./...") {
 						t.Fatal("checker continued after failed test")
 					}
-					if scriptName == "release-check.sh" && !fail {
-						if strings.Count(string(invoked), " test ") != 1 || !strings.Contains(string(invoked), " test -race -v ./...\n") {
-							t.Fatalf("want one complete race-test run, got:\n%s", invoked)
-						}
-						if strings.Count(string(invoked), " vet ./...") != 1 || strings.Count(string(invoked), " build ./...") != 2 {
-							t.Fatalf("want one vet run and only two cross-builds, got:\n%s", invoked)
-						}
-						// These are selected release gates, not incidental loop details.
-						for _, target := range []string{"linux/amd64", "linux/arm64"} {
-							if !strings.Contains(string(invoked), target+" build ./...") {
-								t.Errorf("checker omitted required target %s", target)
-							}
-						}
-						if strings.Contains(string(invoked), "darwin/") {
-							t.Fatal("checker requires best-effort macOS validation")
-						}
-					}
 				})
 			}
 		})
 	}
 }
+
+func TestCheckScriptsReleaseGates(t *testing.T) {
+	script, err := os.ReadFile("scripts/release-check.sh")
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	for _, scenario := range []string{"success", "failed-test", "missing-toolchain"} {
+		t.Run(scenario, func(t *testing.T) {
+			root := t.TempDir()
+			bin := t.TempDir()
+			for _, directory := range []string{"scripts", "nested"} {
+				if err := os.Mkdir(filepath.Join(root, directory), 0700); err != nil {
+					t.Fatal(err)
+				}
+			}
+			checker := filepath.Join(root, "scripts", "release-check.sh")
+			if err := os.WriteFile(checker, script, 0700); err != nil {
+				t.Fatal(err)
+			}
+			calls := filepath.Join(bin, "go.calls")
+			goStub := `#!/bin/sh
+printf '%s|%s|%s|%s|%s|%s\n' "$GOTOOLCHAIN" "$GOPROXY" "${CGO_ENABLED-}" "${GOOS-}" "${GOARCH-}" "$*" >> "$CONFIGKIT_TEST_GO_LOG"
+if [ "${CONFIGKIT_TEST_FAIL-}" = toolchain ] && [ "${1-}" = version ]; then exit 37; fi
+if [ "${CONFIGKIT_TEST_FAIL-}" = test ] && [ "${1-}" = test ]; then exit 37; fi
+`
+			if err := os.WriteFile(filepath.Join(bin, "go"), []byte(goStub), 0700); err != nil {
+				t.Fatal(err)
+			}
+			cmd := exec.Command("/bin/bash", checker)
+			cmd.Dir = filepath.Join(root, "nested")
+			cmd.Env = append(os.Environ(),
+				"PATH="+bin+string(os.PathListSeparator)+os.Getenv("PATH"),
+				"CONFIGKIT_BASELINE_TOOLCHAIN=test-baseline",
+				"CONFIGKIT_TEST_GO_LOG="+calls,
+				"GOOS=", "GOARCH=", "CGO_ENABLED=",
+			)
+			switch scenario {
+			case "failed-test":
+				cmd.Env = append(cmd.Env, "CONFIGKIT_TEST_FAIL=test")
+			case "missing-toolchain":
+				cmd.Env = append(cmd.Env, "CONFIGKIT_TEST_FAIL=toolchain")
+			}
+			output, err := cmd.CombinedOutput()
+			if scenario == "success" && err != nil {
+				t.Fatalf("checker: %v\n%s", err, output)
+			}
+			if scenario != "success" && err == nil {
+				t.Fatalf("checker accepted %s", scenario)
+			}
+			data, err := os.ReadFile(calls)
+			if err != nil {
+				t.Fatal(err)
+			}
+			lines := strings.Split(strings.TrimSpace(string(data)), "\n")
+			for _, line := range lines {
+				if !strings.HasPrefix(line, "test-baseline|off|") {
+					t.Fatalf("toolchain or offline setting lost: %q", line)
+				}
+			}
+			if scenario == "missing-toolchain" {
+				if len(lines) != 1 || !strings.HasSuffix(lines[0], "|version") {
+					t.Fatalf("checker ran after unavailable toolchain: %q", lines)
+				}
+				return
+			}
+			if len(lines) < 2 || lines[1] != "test-baseline|off||||test -mod=readonly -vet=off -race -v ./..." {
+				t.Fatalf("release suite command changed: %q", lines)
+			}
+			if scenario == "failed-test" {
+				if len(lines) != 2 {
+					t.Fatalf("checker continued after failure: %q", lines)
+				}
+				return
+			}
+			want := []string{
+				"test-baseline|off||||version",
+				"test-baseline|off||||test -mod=readonly -vet=off -race -v ./...",
+				"test-baseline|off||||vet -mod=readonly ./...",
+				"test-baseline|off|0|linux|amd64|build -mod=readonly ./...",
+				"test-baseline|off|0|linux|arm64|build -mod=readonly ./...",
+			}
+			if strings.Join(lines, "\n") != strings.Join(want, "\n") {
+				t.Fatalf("unexpected release gates:\n%s", data)
+			}
+		})
+	}
+}

release_publish_test.go

@@ -0,0 +1,359 @@
+package configkit
+
+import (
+	"os"
+	"os/exec"
+	"path/filepath"
+	"strings"
+	"testing"
+)
+
+type releaseFixture struct {
+	t             *testing.T
+	root          string
+	remote        string
+	base          string
+	candidate     string
+	validationLog string
+	realGit       string
+}
+
+func newReleaseFixture(t *testing.T) *releaseFixture {
+	t.Helper()
+	realGit, err := exec.LookPath("git")
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	f := &releaseFixture{
+		t:             t,
+		root:          t.TempDir(),
+		remote:        filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), "remote.git"),
+		validationLog: filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), "validator.log"),
+		realGit:       realGit,
+	}
+	f.git("init", "-q", "-b", "main")
+	f.git("init", "-q", "--bare", f.remote)
+	f.git("config", "user.name", "Test")
+	f.git("config", "user.email", "test@example.invalid")
+	f.git("config", "commit.gpgsign", "false")
+	f.git("config", "tag.gpgsign", "false")
+	f.git("config", "push.followTags", "true")
+	f.git("remote", "add", "origin", f.remote)
+	f.write(".gitignore", "ignored.log\n", 0600)
+	f.write("README.md", "fixture\n", 0600)
+	f.git("add", ".")
+	f.git("commit", "-qm", "Initial source")
+	f.base = f.git("rev-parse", "HEAD")
+	f.git("push", f.remote, "HEAD:refs/heads/main")
+
+	script, err := os.ReadFile("scripts/release.sh")
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	// Only the fixture copy substitutes the authoritative endpoint.
+	local := strings.ReplaceAll(string(script), "https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit.git", f.remote)
+	f.write("scripts/release.sh", local, 0700)
+	f.write("scripts/release-check.sh", `#!/bin/sh
+printf 'validate\n' >> "$CONFIGKIT_VALIDATION_LOG"
+case "${CONFIGKIT_VALIDATOR_ACTION-}" in
+  fail) exit 37 ;;
+  change) git commit --allow-empty -qm 'Changed during validation' ;;
+  dirty) printf 'changed\n' > unexpected.txt ;;
+  remote-tag) git --git-dir="$CONFIGKIT_REMOTE" update-ref refs/tags/v0.9.0 "$CONFIGKIT_BASE" ;;
+esac
+`, 0700)
+	f.write("docs/releases/v0.9.0.md", "# ConfigKit v0.9.0\n\nConfiguration loading fixes.\n\nCompatibility is unchanged.\n", 0600)
+	f.git("add", ".")
+	f.git("commit", "-qm", "Prepared source")
+	f.candidate = f.git("rev-parse", "HEAD")
+	return f
+}
+
+func (f *releaseFixture) write(path, contents string, mode os.FileMode) {
+	f.t.Helper()
+	target := filepath.Join(f.root, path)
+	if err := os.MkdirAll(filepath.Dir(target), 0700); err != nil {
+		f.t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	if err := os.WriteFile(target, []byte(contents), mode); err != nil {
+		f.t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+}
+
+func (f *releaseFixture) git(args ...string) string {
+	f.t.Helper()
+	cmd := exec.Command(f.realGit, args...)
+	cmd.Dir = f.root
+	cmd.Env = append(os.Environ(), "GIT_ALLOW_PROTOCOL=file", "GIT_CONFIG_NOSYSTEM=1", "GIT_CONFIG_GLOBAL=/dev/null")
+	out, err := cmd.CombinedOutput()
+	if err != nil {
+		f.t.Fatalf("git %v: %v\n%s", args, err, out)
+	}
+	return strings.TrimSpace(string(out))
+}
+
+func (f *releaseFixture) gitResult(args ...string) (string, error) {
+	f.t.Helper()
+	cmd := exec.Command(f.realGit, args...)
+	cmd.Dir = f.root
+	cmd.Env = append(os.Environ(), "GIT_ALLOW_PROTOCOL=file", "GIT_CONFIG_NOSYSTEM=1", "GIT_CONFIG_GLOBAL=/dev/null")
+	out, err := cmd.CombinedOutput()
+	return strings.TrimSpace(string(out)), err
+}
+
+func (f *releaseFixture) run(version, behavior, validatorAction string) (string, error) {
+	f.t.Helper()
+	bin := f.t.TempDir()
+	wrapper := `#!/bin/sh
+if [ "${CONFIGKIT_GIT_BEHAVIOR-}" = main-unknown ] || [ "${CONFIGKIT_GIT_BEHAVIOR-}" = tag-unknown ]; then
+  if [ "${1-}" = ls-remote ] && [ -f "$CONFIGKIT_GIT_MARKER" ]; then exit 37; fi
+fi
+case "$*" in
+  push\ *|-c\ remote.origin.mirror=false\ push\ *)
+  case "$*" in
+    *refs/heads/main*)
+      case "${CONFIGKIT_GIT_BEHAVIOR-}" in
+        main-lost) "$CONFIGKIT_REAL_GIT" "$@" >/dev/null 2>&1; exit 37 ;;
+        main-reject) exit 37 ;;
+        main-unknown) : > "$CONFIGKIT_GIT_MARKER"; exit 37 ;;
+      esac ;;
+    *refs/tags/v0.9.0*)
+      case "${CONFIGKIT_GIT_BEHAVIOR-}" in
+        tag-lost) "$CONFIGKIT_REAL_GIT" "$@" >/dev/null 2>&1; exit 37 ;;
+        tag-reject) exit 37 ;;
+        tag-conflict)
+          "$CONFIGKIT_REAL_GIT" --git-dir="$CONFIGKIT_REMOTE" update-ref refs/tags/v0.9.0 "$CONFIGKIT_BASE"
+          exit 37 ;;
+        tag-unknown) : > "$CONFIGKIT_GIT_MARKER"; exit 37 ;;
+      esac ;;
+  esac
+  ;;
+esac
+exec "$CONFIGKIT_REAL_GIT" "$@"
+`
+	if err := os.WriteFile(filepath.Join(bin, "git"), []byte(wrapper), 0700); err != nil {
+		f.t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	nested := filepath.Join(f.root, "nested")
+	if err := os.Mkdir(nested, 0700); err != nil {
+		f.t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	cmd := exec.Command("/bin/bash", filepath.Join(f.root, "scripts", "release.sh"), version)
+	cmd.Dir = nested
+	cmd.Env = append(os.Environ(),
+		"PATH="+bin+string(os.PathListSeparator)+os.Getenv("PATH"),
+		"GIT_ALLOW_PROTOCOL=file", "GIT_CONFIG_NOSYSTEM=1", "GIT_CONFIG_GLOBAL=/dev/null",
+		"CONFIGKIT_VALIDATION_LOG="+f.validationLog,
+		"CONFIGKIT_VALIDATOR_ACTION="+validatorAction,
+		"CONFIGKIT_GIT_BEHAVIOR="+behavior,
+		"CONFIGKIT_GIT_MARKER="+filepath.Join(bin, "push-seen"),
+		"CONFIGKIT_REAL_GIT="+f.realGit,
+		"CONFIGKIT_REMOTE="+f.remote,
+		"CONFIGKIT_BASE="+f.base,
+	)
+	out, err := cmd.CombinedOutput()
+	return string(out), err
+}
+
+func (f *releaseFixture) validations() int {
+	f.t.Helper()
+	data, err := os.ReadFile(f.validationLog)
+	if os.IsNotExist(err) {
+		return 0
+	}
+	if err != nil {
+		f.t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	return strings.Count(string(data), "validate\n")
+}
+
+func (f *releaseFixture) remoteRef(ref string) string {
+	f.t.Helper()
+	value, err := f.gitResult("--git-dir="+f.remote, "rev-parse", "--verify", ref)
+	if err != nil {
+		return ""
+	}
+	return value
+}
+
+func TestReleasePublicationGuards(t *testing.T) {
+	for _, scenario := range []string{
+		"success", "main-already-current", "ignored-file", "unrelated-tag",
+		"malformed-version", "wrong-branch", "wrong-destination", "multiple-destinations",
+		"dirty-worktree", "changed-candidate", "missing-note", "mismatched-note",
+		"local-tag", "remote-tag", "remote-tag-after-validation",
+		"dirty-after-validation", "remote-query-failure",
+		"failed-validation", "non-fast-forward",
+	} {
+		t.Run(scenario, func(t *testing.T) {
+			f := newReleaseFixture(t)
+			version := "v0.9.0"
+			validatorAction := ""
+			switch scenario {
+			case "main-already-current":
+				f.git("push", f.remote, "HEAD:refs/heads/main")
+			case "ignored-file":
+				f.write("ignored.log", "local only\n", 0600)
+			case "unrelated-tag":
+				f.git("tag", "-a", "-m", "Unrelated", "v0.8.0", f.base)
+			case "malformed-version":
+				version = "v00.9.0"
+			case "wrong-branch":
+				f.git("checkout", "-qb", "feature")
+			case "wrong-destination":
+				other := filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), "other.git")
+				f.git("init", "-q", "--bare", other)
+				f.git("remote", "set-url", "--push", "origin", other)
+			case "multiple-destinations":
+				f.git("remote", "set-url", "--push", "origin", f.remote)
+				f.git("remote", "set-url", "--add", "--push", "origin", filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), "other.git"))
+			case "dirty-worktree":
+				f.write("untracked.txt", "unexpected\n", 0600)
+			case "changed-candidate":
+				validatorAction = "change"
+			case "dirty-after-validation":
+				validatorAction = "dirty"
+			case "missing-note":
+				f.git("rm", "docs/releases/v0.9.0.md")
+				f.git("commit", "-qm", "Remove note")
+			case "mismatched-note":
+				f.write("docs/releases/v0.9.0.md", "# ConfigKit v0.9.1\n", 0600)
+				f.git("add", ".")
+				f.git("commit", "-qm", "Mismatch note")
+			case "local-tag":
+				f.git("tag", "v0.9.0")
+			case "remote-tag":
+				f.git("tag", "v0.9.0")
+				f.git("push", f.remote, "refs/tags/v0.9.0")
+				f.git("tag", "-d", "v0.9.0")
+			case "remote-tag-after-validation":
+				validatorAction = "remote-tag"
+			case "remote-query-failure":
+				if err := os.Rename(f.remote, f.remote+".unavailable"); err != nil {
+					t.Fatal(err)
+				}
+			case "failed-validation":
+				validatorAction = "fail"
+			case "non-fast-forward":
+				f.git("checkout", "-qb", "other", f.base)
+				f.git("commit", "--allow-empty", "-qm", "Divergent source")
+				f.git("push", f.remote, "HEAD:refs/heads/main")
+				f.git("checkout", "main")
+			}
+			out, err := f.run(version, "", validatorAction)
+			success := scenario == "success" || scenario == "main-already-current" ||
+				scenario == "ignored-file" || scenario == "unrelated-tag"
+			if success != (err == nil) {
+				t.Fatalf("unexpected publication result: %v\n%s", err, out)
+			}
+			wantChecks := 1
+			switch scenario {
+			case "malformed-version", "wrong-branch", "wrong-destination",
+				"multiple-destinations", "dirty-worktree", "missing-note",
+				"mismatched-note", "local-tag", "remote-tag", "remote-query-failure",
+				"non-fast-forward":
+				wantChecks = 0
+			}
+			if got := f.validations(); got != wantChecks {
+				t.Fatalf("validator ran %d times, want %d", got, wantChecks)
+			}
+			if success {
+				if got := f.remoteRef("refs/heads/main"); got != f.candidate {
+					t.Fatalf("published main %s, want %s", got, f.candidate)
+				}
+				if got := f.remoteRef("refs/tags/v0.9.0^{}"); got != f.candidate {
+					t.Fatalf("tag points to %s, want %s", got, f.candidate)
+				}
+				if f.remoteRef("refs/tags/v0.8.0") != "" {
+					t.Fatal("unrelated local tag was published")
+				}
+				tagData := f.git("--git-dir="+f.remote, "cat-file", "-p", "refs/tags/v0.9.0")
+				_, message, ok := strings.Cut(tagData, "\n\n")
+				if !ok || strings.TrimSpace(message) != strings.TrimSpace(f.git("show", f.candidate+":docs/releases/v0.9.0.md")) {
+					t.Fatal("annotated tag does not contain the checked-in note")
+				}
+			} else if scenario != "remote-tag" && scenario != "remote-tag-after-validation" &&
+				f.remoteRef("refs/tags/v0.9.0") != "" {
+				t.Fatal("failed guard published a tag")
+			}
+		})
+	}
+}
+
+func TestReleasePublicationRecovery(t *testing.T) {
+	for _, scenario := range []string{
+		"main-lost", "main-reject", "main-unknown",
+		"tag-lost", "tag-reject", "tag-conflict", "tag-unknown",
+	} {
+		t.Run(scenario, func(t *testing.T) {
+			f := newReleaseFixture(t)
+			out, err := f.run("v0.9.0", scenario, "")
+			success := scenario == "main-lost" || scenario == "tag-lost"
+			if success != (err == nil) {
+				t.Fatalf("unexpected publication result: %v\n%s", err, out)
+			}
+			if got := f.validations(); got != 1 {
+				t.Fatalf("validator ran %d times", got)
+			}
+			remoteMain := f.remoteRef("refs/heads/main")
+			remoteTag := f.remoteRef("refs/tags/v0.9.0")
+			localTag, localTagErr := f.gitResult("rev-parse", "--verify", "refs/tags/v0.9.0")
+			if localTagErr != nil {
+				localTag = ""
+			}
+			switch scenario {
+			case "main-lost", "tag-lost":
+				if remoteMain != f.candidate || remoteTag == "" || remoteTag != localTag {
+					t.Fatal("confirmed publication did not preserve exact refs")
+				}
+			case "main-reject", "main-unknown":
+				if remoteMain != f.base || remoteTag != "" || localTag != "" {
+					t.Fatal("failed main push created publication state")
+				}
+			case "tag-reject", "tag-unknown":
+				if remoteMain != f.candidate || remoteTag != "" || localTag == "" {
+					t.Fatal("failed tag push did not retain branch-only state")
+				}
+			case "tag-conflict":
+				if remoteMain != f.candidate || remoteTag != f.base || localTag == "" {
+					t.Fatal("conflicting remote tag was overwritten")
+				}
+			}
+		})
+	}
+}
+
+func TestReleasePublicationUsesValidatedDestination(t *testing.T) {
+	for _, behavior := range []string{"success", "main-lost", "tag-lost"} {
+		t.Run(behavior, func(t *testing.T) {
+			f := newReleaseFixture(t)
+			other := filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), "other.git")
+			f.git("init", "-q", "--bare", other)
+			f.git("remote", "set-url", "--push", "origin", f.remote)
+			f.git("config", "url."+other+".pushInsteadOf", f.remote)
+			// These defaults must not broaden the explicit release refspecs when
+			// publishing through the validated named remote.
+			f.git("config", "remote.origin.mirror", "true")
+			f.git("config", "remote.origin.push", "refs/heads/*:refs/heads/*")
+			f.git("branch", "unrelated", f.base)
+			f.git("tag", "-a", "-m", "Unrelated", "v0.8.0", f.base)
+			f.git("--git-dir="+f.remote, "update-ref", "refs/heads/keep", f.base)
+
+			out, err := f.run("v0.9.0", behavior, "")
+			if err != nil {
+				t.Fatalf("publish: %v\n%s", err, out)
+			}
+			if f.validations() != 1 || f.remoteRef("refs/heads/main") != f.candidate ||
+				f.remoteRef("refs/tags/v0.9.0") != f.git("rev-parse", "refs/tags/v0.9.0") {
+				t.Fatal("publication did not reach the validated destination")
+			}
+			if f.remoteRef("refs/heads/keep") != f.base ||
+				f.remoteRef("refs/heads/unrelated") != "" || f.remoteRef("refs/tags/v0.8.0") != "" {
+				t.Fatal("publication changed unrelated refs")
+			}
+			if refs := f.git("--git-dir="+other, "for-each-ref", "--format=%(refname)"); refs != "" {
+				t.Fatalf("publication reached the rewrite destination: %s", refs)
+			}
+		})
+	}
+}

scripts/release-check.sh

@@ -12,68 +12,18 @@ run_go() {
   GOTOOLCHAIN="$toolchain" GOPROXY=off go "$@"
 }
 
-check_toolchain() {
-  local toolchain=$1
-  GOTOOLCHAIN="$toolchain" GOPROXY=off go version >/dev/null
-  run_go "$toolchain" mod download
-}
-
-check_toolchain "$baseline_toolchain"
-bash -n scripts/release-check.sh
-
-temporary_dir=$(mktemp -d)
-trap 'rm -rf -- "$temporary_dir"' EXIT
-candidate_manifest=$temporary_dir/candidate-files
-while IFS= read -r -d '' candidate_file; do
-  if [[ -e "$candidate_file" || -L "$candidate_file" ]]; then
-    printf '%s\0' "$candidate_file" >>"$candidate_manifest"
-  fi
-done < <(git ls-files --cached --others --exclude-standard -z)
-tar --null --files-from="$candidate_manifest" --create --file=- |
-  tar --extract --file=- --directory="$temporary_dir"
-(
-  cd "$temporary_dir"
-  GOTOOLCHAIN="$baseline_toolchain" GOPROXY=off go mod tidy
-)
-diff -u go.mod "$temporary_dir/go.mod"
-diff -u go.sum "$temporary_dir/go.sum"
-
-go_files=()
-while IFS= read -r -d '' go_file; do
-  if [[ -f "$go_file" ]]; then
-    go_files+=("$go_file")
-  fi
-done < <(git ls-files --cached --others --exclude-standard -z -- '*.go')
-if ((${#go_files[@]})); then
-  unformatted=$(gofmt -l -- "${go_files[@]}")
-  if [[ -n "$unformatted" ]]; then
-    printf 'gofmt required for:\n%s\n' "$unformatted" >&2
-    exit 1
-  fi
+if ! GOTOOLCHAIN="$baseline_toolchain" GOPROXY=off go version >/dev/null; then
+  printf 'release toolchain %s is unavailable; acquire it before validation\n' "$baseline_toolchain" >&2
+  exit 1
 fi
 
-git diff --check HEAD --
-while IFS= read -r -d '' candidate_file; do
-  if [[ ! -f "$candidate_file" ]]; then
-    continue
-  fi
-  case "$candidate_file" in
-    *.go|*.md|*.sh|go.mod|go.sum|LICENSE|.gitignore|AGENTS.md)
-      if LC_ALL=C grep -nE '[[:blank:]]+$' -- "$candidate_file"; then
-        printf 'trailing whitespace found in %s\n' "$candidate_file" >&2
-        exit 1
-      fi
-      ;;
-  esac
-done < <(git ls-files --cached --others --exclude-standard -z)
-
 # Verbose output reports skipped cases without a separate evidence run.
-run_go "$baseline_toolchain" test -race -v ./...
-run_go "$baseline_toolchain" vet ./...
+run_go "$baseline_toolchain" test -mod=readonly -vet=off -race -v ./...
+run_go "$baseline_toolchain" vet -mod=readonly ./...
 
 # Only release-validated targets gate publication; macOS is best-effort.
 for target in linux/amd64 linux/arm64; do
   target_os=${target%/*}
   target_arch=${target#*/}
-  GOTOOLCHAIN="$baseline_toolchain" GOPROXY=off CGO_ENABLED=0 GOOS="$target_os" GOARCH="$target_arch" go build ./...
+  GOTOOLCHAIN="$baseline_toolchain" GOPROXY=off CGO_ENABLED=0 GOOS="$target_os" GOARCH="$target_arch" go build -mod=readonly ./...
 done

scripts/release.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+set -euo pipefail
+
+repository_dir=$(cd -- "$(dirname -- "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}")/.." && pwd)
+cd "$repository_dir"
+
+remote_url=https://gitea.maximumdirect.net/eric/ConfigKit.git
+
+fail() {
+  printf '%s\n' "$*" >&2
+  exit 1
+}
+
+check_candidate() {
+  local context=$1 current status
+  current=$(git branch --show-current) || fail "$context: cannot read the current branch"
+  [[ "$current" == main ]] || fail "$context: release requires the main branch"
+  status=$(git status --porcelain=v1 --untracked-files=all) || fail "$context: cannot inspect the worktree"
+  [[ -z "$status" ]] || fail "$context: release requires a clean index and worktree"
+  current=$(git rev-parse --verify HEAD) || fail "$context: cannot identify the candidate"
+  [[ "$current" == "$candidate" ]] || fail "$context: candidate changed; commit and validate it again"
+}
+
+check_unused_version() {
+  if git show-ref --verify --quiet "refs/tags/$version"; then
+    fail "version already has a local tag"
+  fi
+  local oid result
+  if oid=$(read_remote_ref "refs/tags/$version"); then
+    fail "version already has an authoritative tag"
+  else
+    result=$?
+    ((result == 2)) || fail "cannot determine authoritative tag state; publication status is unknown"
+  fi
+}
+
+read_remote_ref() {
+  local ref=$1 response result
+  if response=$(git ls-remote --refs --exit-code origin "$ref" 2>/dev/null); then
+    [[ "$response" == *$'\t'"$ref" ]] || return 3
+    printf '%s\n' "${response%%$'\t'*}"
+  else
+    result=$?
+    ((result == 2)) && return 2
+    return 3
+  fi
+}
+
+if (($# != 1)); then
+  fail "usage: ./scripts/release.sh vMAJOR.MINOR.PATCH"
+fi
+version=$1
+[[ "$version" =~ ^v(0|[1-9][0-9]*)\.(0|[1-9][0-9]*)\.(0|[1-9][0-9]*)$ ]] ||
+  fail "release version must be a stable vMAJOR.MINOR.PATCH without leading zeroes"
+
+fetch_urls=$(git remote get-url --all origin 2>/dev/null) || fail "origin is unavailable"
+push_urls=$(git remote get-url --push --all origin 2>/dev/null) || fail "origin push destination is unavailable"
+[[ "$fetch_urls" == "$remote_url" && "$push_urls" == "$remote_url" ]] ||
+  fail "origin must have exactly the authoritative fetch and push destination"
+
+candidate=$(git rev-parse --verify HEAD) || fail "cannot identify the candidate"
+check_candidate "before validation"
+check_unused_version
+
+note_path="docs/releases/$version.md"
+note_file=$(mktemp)
+trap 'rm -f -- "$note_file"' EXIT
+git show "$candidate:$note_path" >"$note_file" 2>/dev/null ||
+  fail "matching release note is absent from the candidate"
+IFS= read -r title <"$note_file" || [[ -n "$title" ]] ||
+  fail "matching release note is empty"
+[[ "$title" == "# ConfigKit $version" ]] || fail "release note title does not match the version"
+
+if remote_main=$(read_remote_ref refs/heads/main); then
+  :
+else
+  result=$?
+  ((result == 2)) && fail "authoritative main is absent"
+  fail "cannot read authoritative main; publication status is unknown"
+fi
+git fetch --no-tags origin refs/heads/main >/dev/null ||
+  fail "cannot fetch authoritative main"
+fetched_main=$(git rev-parse --verify FETCH_HEAD) || fail "cannot inspect fetched main"
+git merge-base --is-ancestor "$fetched_main" "$candidate" ||
+  fail "candidate cannot advance authoritative main without discarding history"
+
+./scripts/release-check.sh || fail "release validation failed; no refs were published"
+check_candidate "after validation"
+check_unused_version
+
+# Use the named remote whose resolved destinations were checked above: a literal
+# URL can apply pushInsteadOf even when origin's explicit push URL does not.
+# Disable mirror defaults as well as implicit tags; publish only our refspec.
+if git -c remote.origin.mirror=false push --no-follow-tags origin "$candidate:refs/heads/main"; then
+  :
+else
+  if observed_main=$(read_remote_ref refs/heads/main); then
+    [[ "$observed_main" == "$candidate" ]] ||
+      fail "main push did not publish candidate $candidate; authoritative main differs"
+  else
+    result=$?
+    ((result == 2)) && fail "main push failed for $candidate; authoritative main is absent"
+    fail "main push outcome is unknown for $candidate; inspect authoritative main before retrying"
+  fi
+fi
+
+check_candidate "main at $candidate; tag not yet published"
+git tag -a -F "$note_file" --cleanup=verbatim "$version" "$candidate" ||
+  fail "main is at $candidate; could not create local tag $version"
+tag_target=$(git rev-parse --verify "refs/tags/$version^{}") ||
+  fail "main is at $candidate; cannot verify local tag $version"
+[[ "$tag_target" == "$candidate" ]] || fail "main is at $candidate; local tag $version targets another commit"
+tag_type=$(git cat-file -t "refs/tags/$version") ||
+  fail "main is at $candidate; cannot inspect local tag $version"
+[[ "$tag_type" == tag ]] || fail "main is at $candidate; local tag $version is not annotated"
+tag_oid=$(git rev-parse --verify "refs/tags/$version") ||
+  fail "main is at $candidate; cannot identify local tag $version"
+
+if git -c remote.origin.mirror=false push --no-follow-tags origin "refs/tags/$version:refs/tags/$version"; then
+  :
+else
+  if observed_tag=$(read_remote_ref "refs/tags/$version"); then
+    [[ "$observed_tag" == "$tag_oid" ]] ||
+      fail "authoritative tag $version conflicts with the local tag at $candidate; never replace it"
+  else
+    result=$?
+    ((result == 2)) &&
+      fail "tag push failed; main is at $candidate, but local tag $version is unpublished"
+    fail "tag $version push outcome is unknown for $candidate; retain the local tag and inspect authoritative state"
+  fi
+fi
+
+printf 'Published %s at %s\n' "$version" "$candidate"