{"content": "todo 1 next", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 57 \u2014 Never merge the overnight refactor into main before its pull request\u2026 \u2014 Messages 15005, 15006, 15109, 15110 (2026-10-04): all refactor work goes on branch overnight-refactor and reaches the user as one pull request, which they read in the morning; nothing of it is merged into main until they say so. Hotfixes the user explicitly asks for go to main at once and are merged into the branch.; rule 61 \u2014 Features wait as pull requests until approved; only hotfixes merge\u2026 \u2014 Message 17118 (2026-10-06), after the overnight refactor merged as 2.252.0: start new work in a new branch, do not merge, write the pull request. Every pull request or new feature is parked until the user approves it. Hotfixes can be merged into main immediately (by a dispatched agent in a worktree of main, rule 60).; rule 64 \u2014 A finished feature is merged into main without waiting for approval \u2014 The user, message 17815 (2026-10-07): 'make sure that no pull requests are lingering on the repository. You may merge them into main... You are allowed to merge everything into main once the feature is completed.' This replaces rule 61's wait for approval: a feature still goes on its own branch, and once it is complete, tested and its whole suite passes, it is merged into main and released, and no pull request is left open.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "fact 34 \u2014 A hooks list in a checkout's .claude/settings.json stops every\u2026 \u2014 Seen 2026-10-08: since commit 707a82915 the committed .claude/settings.json held {\"hooks\": []}; current Claude Code answers a hooks value that is not an object with a SettingsWarning dialog, which a headless helper cannot answer, so helpers 183 and 184 exited before doing anything (their launch logs in .journal/runtime/launches/ show it). This repository's journal hooks live in settings.local.json; the committed settings.json stays {}.; law L3 \u2014 Read narrowly - grep for the line, sed a range, head the file; never\u2026 \u2014 Everything a tool returns stays in the context for good and is paid for on every turn after it. Search before you read, read the range you need, and cap output with grep, head or tail. Read a whole file only when you need all of it.; rule 48 \u2014 The viewer is built from its component library, and pages only\u2026 \u2014 Message 4258. Every visual piece the viewer shows more than once, or that a user would recognise as the same kind of thing (a dialog, a side panel or inspector, a dropdown, a list row, a switch, a button), is one component in web/src/kit, extracted aggressively, and every page composes those components instead of building its own copy. Before writing markup or styles in a page, look for the kit component that already does it and extend it with a prop; a second hand-built version is a bug. The side panel that animated in but not out, while a separate skill panel did both, is the example.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 54 \u2014 Settings and feature switches are read at boot and on change, never\u2026 \u2014 The user, message 13349: the application boots, determines every feature and setting once, and re-evaluates only when something changes, such as a setting or a plugin. Never lazy-load settings.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 36 \u2014 Clean, DRY, idiomatic before it is committed, never after it is\u2026 \u2014 The user should never be the one who finds duplication, dead code, a clumsy name or a pattern the codebase does not use. Read the diff before every commit as a reviewer would, and fix what is not clean then, not in a follow-up after a complaint.; rule 38 \u2014 Never change the git branch until the user says so, by name \u2014 The work happens on the branch the user named. That was main until message 5929 and question 80 (2026-09-23), which moved the sins work to the branch sins. Do not create, switch to or merge any other branch unless the user names it in their own words.; rule 41 \u2014 Keep moving, run the whole suite before every commit, never wait \u2014 The full suite runs in about seven seconds: .venv/bin/python -m pytest -q --timeout=300 -n auto. Run it before every commit instead of picking tests by name. Group rows that sit in the same code into one sitting: write them all, test once, commit once. And never wait, not for a subagent, a build, or an answer you can carry on without. Dispatch it and keep working. If you truly are waiting on something, say so in the work log.; rule 46 \u2014 Only commit and push once the whole journal is proven to boot \u2014 Messages 2178 and 2179. A release that has not been started for real can crash every project that installs it, as 2.78.3 did for Codex and 2.84.0 did to project records. Before every commit and push: the full suite passes, including tests/test_it_boots.py, which installs a packed copy into a fresh project, launches Claude and Codex from it, writes a project record, upgrades again and checks the record survives. When a change touches launching, installing or upgrading, also start a real journal in a scratch project and close it properly afterwards, leaving no process behind.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your command ran 31s in the foreground and was moved to the background \u2014 carry on with other work; you are told when it ends. Start a command you expect to take long in the background yourself", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your command ran 31s in the foreground and was moved to the background \u2014 carry on with other work; you are told when it ends. Start a command you expect to take long in the background yourself", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your command ran 33s in the foreground and was moved to the background \u2014 carry on with other work; you are told when it ends. Start a command you expect to take long in the background yourself", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "Code Commandments \u2014 before you commit \u2014 you've changed 41 judged files since th\u2026 \u2014 Code Commandments \u2014 before you commit: you've changed 41 judged files since the last commit. Consider running `commandments judge --changes` to confirm they conform, and fix any sin at its SOURCE (don't launder a finding with a default/cast/null-check). This is a one-time nudge for this batch \u2014 if you've already judged, or these changes aren't worth a scan, just say so and carry on.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your command ran 30s in the foreground and was moved to the background \u2014 carry on with other work; you are told when it ends. Start a command you expect to take long in the background yourself", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "fact 13 \u2014 This live session runs the installed copy in .journal/journal.pyz \u2014 The running journal (server, hooks, CLI) runs from .journal/journal.pyz with its viewer and skills in .journal/src, never from the repo. A change in the repo reaches it only through python3 src/journal.py --root .journal upgrade, which packs the zip again. A commit alone changes nothing that is running.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your command ran 33s in the foreground and was moved to the background \u2014 carry on with other work; you are told when it ends. Start a command you expect to take long in the background yourself", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 65 \u2014 Run only new and affected tests while working; the whole suite only\u2026 \u2014 The user, messages 17914 to 17917 (2026-10-07): 'stop running the whole test suite and wasting my time... please only run the new or affected tests, and then, whenever you are merging to main or publishing to main, you can run the full test suite.' Replaces rule 41's whole suite before every commit: on a feature branch, run the tests beside what changed (journal check touched, or the feature's test.py and the browser scenarios it touches); the whole suite runs once, before a merge into main and its release.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your command ran 32s in the foreground and was moved to the background \u2014 carry on with other work; you are told when it ends. Start a command you expect to take long in the background yourself", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open, with nothing logged \u2014 journal work log 1 \"\" \u2014 then journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "the log tag does this in one step \u2014 [!log:N] makes the turn itself the log entry; it runs only when it opens the last text of your turn", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 42 \u2014 Every user-facing text passes the formatters before it leaves the\u2026 \u2014 Not only a brief. A title, an abstract, an outcome and every section body are read by a person, so each goes through the same formatters on its way to the viewer \u2014 chat turns, activity items, to-do rows, inspector pages, docs alike. One field formatted out of five is not a rule, it is an accident, and it is how a raw tag ended up in the activity list after the tags feature had been stripping them for weeks. When a new field carries words a person reads, it joins the list in the same place.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "Code Commandments \u2014 before you wrap up \u2014 you've changed 1 judged file since the\u2026 \u2014 Code Commandments \u2014 before you wrap up: you've changed 1 judged file since the last commit. Consider running `commandments judge --changes` to confirm they conform, and fix any sin at its SOURCE (don't launder a finding with a default/cast/null-check). This is a one-time nudge for this batch \u2014 if you've already judged, or these changes aren't worth a scan, just say so and carry on.; work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 43 \u2014 A request or hook over its budget is fixed before the next release \u2014 Comment 1151 on this rule. When the faults feature reports a request, a hook or a command slower than its budget, file it as a to-do at once. It does not jump ahead of the work in hand, but no version is published while one is still open: profile it, fix it, and verify the new time before the release goes out. The budget is 50ms, because everything runs locally against files.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 1 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 1 --how \"\", or journal work park 1 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "chat etiquette - a line from the journal is an instruction, not a message\u2026 \u2014 a turn that only handles a journal line needs no words: act on it, or say once in the chat what you wait on, then carry on; what the user needs to know still goes to the chat", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "waiting: 1 unread todo 1", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "you ran the same check 3 times in a row - tail -2 /tmp/run3.txt | cut -c1-200\u2026 \u2014 if you are waiting for something to change, say journal work await \"\" and end your turn: you are asked to look again every five minutes, and a background command tells you itself when it ends. Keep checking only if each look moves the work on.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your chat talked about the journal's workings - \"To-do 3402 is done\" \u2014 the user sees replies, reactions, pills and reads themselves; say what the work is instead", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "fact 30 \u2014 The tunler server refuses TLS for any subdomain without a tunnel \u2014 Seen 2026-10-04 in the server's docker logs (ssh root@tunler.jessegall.nl, container tunler): 'TLS handshake error ... host \"journal-probe.tunler.jessegall.nl\" not allowed'. A made-up subdomain never answers even when the server is healthy; probe https://tunler.jessegall.nl/ for the server itself. Root SSH to the server works.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 27 \u2014 Name a declaration with the word a reader already knows \u2014 An attribute, a variable or a field gets the ordinary programming word for what it holds, not an evocative one. was, heard and alone were poetry; aliases, notify_actions and urgent_actions are what they are. The test: could a reader who has never seen this codebase guess what it holds from the name alone? Prose belongs in the help text and the abstract, where it is read as prose. This does not license abbreviations \u2014 a plain word in full, not a short one.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "fact 24 \u2014 An answer followed by tool calls can be missing from Claude's\u2026 \u2014 Seen 2026-09-24 for messages 9391-9404: text blocks opening with [!reply:n] that were followed by tool calls never appeared in the session's jsonl (only thinking and tool_use rows did), so the journal never saw them and the replies were lost. When a turn goes on after answering, send the answer with journal message reply \"\" instead of the tag.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "law L5 \u2014 Every subagent dispatch names the agent - a human name, a little\u2026 \u2014 A name is how the user and the chat tell subagents apart and how they are messaged later; an id or a task line is not a name. Start the dispatch's description with the name, a colon, then the task, such as \"Dr. Einstein: profile the slow hooks\" or \"Coco Rams: draw the plan card\". A designer can borrow from famous designers, a researcher from famous scientists, mixed up for fun.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 41 \u2014 Keep moving, run the whole suite before every commit, never wait \u2014 The full suite runs in about seven seconds: .venv/bin/python -m pytest -q --timeout=300 -n auto. Run it before every commit instead of picking tests by name. Group rows that sit in the same code into one sitting: write them all, test once, commit once. And never wait, not for a subagent, a build, or an answer you can carry on without. Dispatch it and keep working. If you truly are waiting on something, say so in the work log.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "fact 23 \u2014 Every upgrade brings system sequences and their triggers in line\u2026 \u2014 install.py runs ship_sequences after the migrations on each upgrade, so features/sequences/shipped.py is the whole source: change its wording and the next upgrade updates every journal, no migration needed. Shipped rows carry system=True and are read-only for everyone but SYSTEM (controllers/base.py _shipped).", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 57 \u2014 Never merge the overnight refactor into main before its pull request\u2026 \u2014 Messages 15005, 15006, 15109, 15110 (2026-10-04): all refactor work goes on branch overnight-refactor and reaches the user as one pull request, which they read in the morning; nothing of it is merged into main until they say so. Hotfixes the user explicitly asks for go to main at once and are merged into the branch.; rule 61 \u2014 Features wait as pull requests until approved; only hotfixes merge\u2026 \u2014 Message 17118 (2026-10-06), after the overnight refactor merged as 2.252.0: start new work in a new branch, do not merge, write the pull request. Every pull request or new feature is parked until the user approves it. Hotfixes can be merged into main immediately (by a dispatched agent in a worktree of main, rule 60).; rule 64 \u2014 A finished feature is merged into main without waiting for approval \u2014 The user, message 17815 (2026-10-07): 'make sure that no pull requests are lingering on the repository. You may merge them into main... You are allowed to merge everything into main once the feature is completed.' This replaces rule 61's wait for approval: a feature still goes on its own branch, and once it is complete, tested and its whole suite passes, it is merged into main and released, and no pull request is left open.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your command ran 31s in the foreground and was moved to the background \u2014 carry on with other work; you are told when it ends. Start a command you expect to take long in the background yourself", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "law L3 \u2014 Read narrowly - grep for the line, sed a range, head the file; never\u2026 \u2014 Everything a tool returns stays in the context for good and is paid for on every turn after it. Search before you read, read the range you need, and cap output with grep, head or tail. Read a whole file only when you need all of it.; rule 54 \u2014 Settings and feature switches are read at boot and on change, never\u2026 \u2014 The user, message 13349: the application boots, determines every feature and setting once, and re-evaluates only when something changes, such as a setting or a plugin. Never lazy-load settings.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 2 in hand \u2014 Hosting hardening for a journal on a server \u2014 if this is not what you are doing, end it or park it and start the work you are in", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 2 is still open, with nothing logged \u2014 journal work log 2 \"\" \u2014 then journal work end 2 --how \"\", or journal work park 2 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "Code Commandments \u2014 before you wrap up \u2014 you've changed 5 judged files since th\u2026 \u2014 Code Commandments \u2014 before you wrap up: you've changed 5 judged files since the last commit. Consider running `commandments judge --changes` to confirm they conform, and fix any sin at its SOURCE (don't launder a finding with a default/cast/null-check). This is a one-time nudge for this batch \u2014 if you've already judged, or these changes aren't worth a scan, just say so and carry on.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 2 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 2 --how \"\", or journal work park 2 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 2 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 2 --how \"\", or journal work park 2 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "work 2 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 2 --how \"\", or journal work park 2 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your wait for the touched tests for 3261 (hosted_journal, runtime_cleanup\u2026 \u2014 say journal work await \"\" again if you are still only waiting", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 45 \u2014 No prose words as names in code - said, says, heard, spoke, told\u2026 \u2014 Messages 1360 and 1698. The user has said more than once that code must not read like prose: a variable, attribute, property or function is named for what it holds or does (text, command, labels, lines), never with a verb from a story. 'says' on the Design type (1360) and 'said = call.said.lower()' in features/recital.py (1698) are the examples. Rule 27 states the naming rule; this one carries the words, so writing one of them whispers it. Before writing a name, ask whether a reader who has never seen the code would know what it holds.; work 2 is still open \u2014 end it or park it before you stop: journal work end 2 --how \"\", or journal work park 2 \"\"", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your wait for the browser test of hosted_journal rerun alone (/tmp/b.txt) is\u2026 \u2014 say journal work await \"\" again if you are still only waiting", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your wait for the baseline browser test run without my change (/tmp/b0.txt) is\u2026 \u2014 say journal work await \"\" again if you are still only waiting", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your wait for the verbose browser test run (/tmp/b1.txt) to see which wait\u2026 \u2014 say journal work await \"\" again if you are still only waiting", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "your wait for the remaining touched tests for 3261 (/tmp/c.txt); the browser\u2026 \u2014 say journal work await \"\" again if you are still only waiting", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "rule 42 \u2014 Every user-facing text passes the formatters before it leaves the\u2026 \u2014 Not only a brief. A title, an abstract, an outcome and every section body are read by a person, so each goes through the same formatters on its way to the viewer \u2014 chat turns, activity items, to-do rows, inspector pages, docs alike. One field formatted out of five is not a rule, it is an accident, and it is how a raw tag ended up in the activity list after the tags feature had been stripping them for weeks. When a new field carries words a person reads, it joins the list in the same place.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}} {"content": "Code Commandments \u2014 before you commit \u2014 you've changed 5 judged files since the\u2026 \u2014 Code Commandments \u2014 before you commit: you've changed 5 judged files since the last commit. Consider running `commandments judge --changes` to confirm they conform, and fix any sin at its SOURCE (don't launder a finding with a default/cast/null-check). This is a one-time nudge for this batch \u2014 if you've already judged, or these changes aren't worth a scan, just say so and carry on.", "meta": {"from": "journal"}}