Hacktoberfest 2026: the issues maintainers tagged for October, open and beginner-friendly. Browse Hacktoberfest issues

[Phase 16] S15 — Documentation: claims bound to code

Open
  • Is something wrong?
#901 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Newbie friendliness
45/100
Issue type
Documentation
Clarity
Needs clarification
Activity status
Active
Tech stack
html, python
Domain
documentation

Research direction

Read the roadmap section at docs/roadmap/phase-16-trust-surface-hardening.md lines 746-795 and the existing auto-revert.md page. Locate the eight auto-revert claim instances across the codebase and the six site locales, then review check_cli_exit_code_prose.py to understand the guard pattern. Run ./.venv/bin/python to execute the test gauntlet. Done when all exit criteria pass: no outdated legal dates, no restore claims in surfaces, exit-code prose matches _PUBLIC_EXIT_CODES, and all guards are green.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

phase: 16 source: roadmap

Roadmap · Phase 16, step S15 · size XL · 10 unit(s) · planned in docs/roadmap/phase-16-trust-surface-hardening.md:746-795

Summary

Published claims the code does not back, plus the guards that would have caught them. Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 moves Annex III high-risk obligations to 2 December 2027 and Annex I to 2 August 2028, while current surfaces still tie "full enforcement" to 2 August 2026. The auto-revert "rollback" claim survives in eight places across nine files under four wordings — _revert_model deletes and restores nothing. EN, TR and all six site locales change in the same commit. (DOCS-06 is a residual wording fix only; its main claim was refuted.)

Units

Unit Tracked by (October 2026 review)
F-W20260729-DOCS-01 #75 · #748 · #806
F-W20260729-DOCS-02 #87 · #89 · #128 · #280 · #282 · #284 · #291 · #360 · #367 · #453 · #458 · #459 · #519 · #540 · #556 · #557 · #558 · #599 · #683 · #684 · #685
F-W20260729-DOCS-04 #114 · #208 · #345 · #570 · #576 · #580 · #583 · #594 · #615 · #616 · #622 · #624 · #633 · #684 · #710 · #725 · #734 · #766 · #772 · #777 · #784 · #790 · #791 · #820
F-W20260729-DOCS-03 #114 · #208 · #367 · #576 · #580 · #583 · #594 · #684 · #725 · #734 · #766 · #777
C31-EXIT-CODE-PROSE (= DOCS-07 + OPS-24) #87 · #150 · #162 · #183 · #369 · #445 · #447 · #454 · #543 · #547 · #558 · #580 · #583 · #591 · #604 · #607 · #633 · #654 · #655 · #657 · #668 · #670 · #671 · #676 · #680 · #681 · #686 · #715 · #719 · #721 · #742 · #748 · #766 · #774 · #776
C31-DOC-SCHEMA-PROSE (= DOCS-08 + DOCS-09) #75 · #101 · #147 · #199 · #228 · #229 · #230 · #231 · #237 · #248 · #257 · #358 · #359 · #424 · #425 · #426 · #427 · #452 · #503 · #545 · #546 · #550 · #558 · #569 · #589 · #593 · #615 · #624 · #625 · #627 · #641 · #642 · #662 · #663 · #670 · #671 · #677 · #689 · #791 · #801 · #813
F-W20260729-DOCS-14, F-W20260729-DOCS-15, F-W20260729-DOCS-16 #128 · #360 · #367 · #453 · #458 · #459 · #519 · #540 · #556 · #557 · #558 · #598 · #683 · #684 · #685 · #732 · #770 · #771 · #797 · #799
F-W20260729-DOCS-06 #366

Decisions this step executes

  • GTM — AI Act moat framing after Regulation (EU) 2026/1744: retarget to 2 December 2027, framing preserved.

Plan

  • Commit 1: legal dates + a freshness guard. Commit 2: the auto-revert semantics sweep + a semantic guard. Commit 3: site runtime claims across six locales, static fallbacks, privacy / localStorage, a11y and assets. Commit 4: exit-code prose, ghost config keys, the staging path and guard extensions.
  • docs/roadmap/risks-and-decisions.md's append-only Decision Log is not a target; its live risk rows are.
  • Extend check_cli_exit_code_prose.py non-strict first, triage the baseline, then flip.

Exit criteria

  • No current surface ties high-risk obligations to August 2026, and a guard fails on reintroduction.
  • No locale claims an unconditional exit 3 or a generated conformity declaration, verified in a rendered-DOM-equivalent test for EN plus at least one other locale.
  • A grep for restore claims over current surfaces returns zero (the canonical auto-revert.md page is exempt because it quotes the wrong claim to refute it).
  • A localStorage snapshot after every wizard step contains no credential-class value.
  • Every current surface states verify-audit as 0/1/2/6 with the "1 = unverified, 6 = compared and failed" distinction, and a meta-test scans the canonical exit-code statements in all four rulebooks against _PUBLIC_EXIT_CODES.
  • An inline-code config key in prose that does not resolve against ForgeConfig fails the guard.
  • aria-expanded tracks drawer state across all four flows, and every asset referenced from site/*.html resolves in the deploy source tree.

How to deliver

  • One root-cause family, committed on its own; then an Opus review round and a Sonnet review round, each with verified findings fixed and committed before the next step begins.
  • A reproducer that is red before the fix and green after; the full gauntlet from CLAUDE.md passes under ./.venv/bin/python.
  • Every English documentation edit ships with its Turkish mirror in the same commit; a new or renamed audit event gets its EN and TR catalog rows in the same PR.
  • A step that grows a deferred module carries its budget_history justification in the same diff; a widened guard rolls out non-strict first, then flips.
  • Commit bodies cite Absorbs F-W20260729-…; the CHANGELOG [Unreleased] section gets an entry only for a change a user or library consumer can observe (decision C-20).

Planned in docs/roadmap/phase-16-trust-surface-hardening.md (read at f94595f). Unit IDs (F-W20260729-…) come from the 2026-07-29/30 full-project review; the issue numbers next to them are the October 2026 review's records of the same defects.

Dominant language
Python
Stars
9
Forks
1
Avg merge
8h 10m
Merged PRs (30d)
5

Getting set up

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from HodeTech/ForgeLM

All issues in HodeTech/ForgeLM

Similar issues

More Python issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.