## Post-Release Assessment — v3.43.0

**Release commit:** `a07564d`
**Tag:** `3.43.0`
**Cycle:** #205 / PR #206 — Go kernel Phase 1: package index/lockfile/restore
**Skill loaded:** `src/agent/skills/cdd/post-release/SKILL.md`
**Assessor role:** Reviewer (Sigma) — default releaser per CDD §1.4

### 1. Coherence Measurement

- **Baseline:** v3.42.0 — C_Σ A · α A · β A+ · γ A · L5
- **This release:** v3.43.0 — C_Σ A · α A · β A · γ A · L7
- **Delta:**
  - **α held A.** Go types in `internal/pkg/` structurally mirror `src/lib/cn_package.ml`: ManifestDep/LockedDep/Lockfile/PackageIndex/IndexEntry map 1:1. JSON field names match. `IsFirstParty` preserves OCaml semantics. Restore flow matches `cn_deps.ml::restore_one_http` step-for-step.
  - **β returned to A (from A+).** The Go module introduces a boundary discipline question: `internal/pkg/` claims "no IO" but contains `ReadLockfile`/`ReadPackageIndex` (F4). In OCaml, these live in `src/cmd/`, not `src/lib/`. This is a real β gap — the Go module doesn't yet mirror the purity split that Move 2 established. The β A+ from v3.42.0 (doc authority convergence) still holds; the Go purity gap pulls β back to A.
  - **γ held A.** 1 review round, 0 blockers, 4 non-blocking findings. First-push CI green. Zero draft iterations. §2.5b check 8 validated with Go toolchain available locally. CDD artifacts complete (README, SELF-COHERENCE, GATE). Two-agent cycle: Claude authored, Sigma reviewed/released/assessed.
  - **Level L7.** New system boundary: Go module coexists with OCaml. The kernel rewrite has its first proven slice. This shapes every future Phase 2+ cycle.
- **Coherence contract closed?** **Yes.** All 6 ACs met. The 4 non-blocking findings are follow-up work, not open contract debt.

### 2. Encoding Lag

| Issue | Title | Type | Design | Impl | Lag |
|-------|-------|------|--------|------|-----|
| #192 | Runtime kernel rewrite: OCaml → Go | feature | 4-phase scope + Go skill | Phase 1 complete | low |
| #193 | `llm` step execution + binding substitution | feature | needs design | not started | growing (7 cycles) |
| #186 | Package restructuring | feature | design thread exists | not started | growing |
| #175 | CTB → orchestrator IR compiler | feature | CTB-v4.0.0-VISION.md | blocked on #193 | growing |
| #182 | Core refactor (umbrella) | feature | CORE-REFACTOR.md | Moves 1-3 complete | low |
| #162 | Modular CLI commands | feature | Move 1 shipped | partial | low |
| #168 | L8 candidate tracking | process | observation | observation only | low |
| #154 | Thread event model P1 | feature | converged | not started | stale |
| #153 | Thread event model | feature | converged | not started | stale |
| #100 | Memory as first-class faculty | feature | partial | not started | stale |
| #94 | cn cdd: mechanize CDD invariants | feature | partial | not started | stale |

**MCI/MCA balance:** **Freeze MCI continues.** 3 issues at growing lag (#193, #186, #175). #192 moved from growing to low (Phase 1 shipped). #180 closed last cycle. The freeze threshold is ≥3; still met. Next MCA must be implementation.

### 3. Process Learning

**What went wrong:** Nothing significant. The cycle was clean — first-push green, one review round, zero blockers. The only structural observation is F4 (IO in the pure package), which is a boundary discipline issue, not a process failure.

**What went right:**
1. **Two-agent cycle executed cleanly.** Claude authored (steps 0–7a), Sigma reviewed/released/assessed (steps 8–13). The §1.4 role chain worked with no handoff friction.
2. **First-push CI green with Go.** Claude had local Go toolchain, verified before push. Check 8 validated.
3. **Issue handoff worked.** #205 was specific enough that Claude produced a clean PR without clarification loops. The issue writing investment paid off.
4. **Go skill compliance demonstrated.** context.Context, errors.Is, defer, slog, stdlib-only — all eng/go rules followed.

**Skill patches:** None needed this cycle.

**Active skill re-evaluation:** No review findings that a loaded skill would have prevented. F4 (purity boundary) is a design decision, not a skill gap — the eng/go skill doesn't prescribe the `internal/pkg/` vs `internal/restore/` split at this granularity.

**CDD improvement disposition:** No patch needed. Justification: (a) zero blockers, (b) the 4 findings are all judgment-level design choices appropriate for Phase 1, (c) the two-agent cycle executed within all targets.

### 4. Review Quality

**PRs this cycle:** 1 (#206)
**Avg review rounds:** 1.0 (within ≤2 target for code PRs)
**Superseded PRs:** 0
**Finding breakdown:** 1 mechanical (F1) / 3 judgment (F2–F4) / 4 total
**Mechanical ratio:** 25% (above 20% threshold)
**Action:** F1 (reimplemented `strings.Contains`) is a single trivial instance. The 25% is inflated by the small denominator (1/4). No process issue warranted — this is not a recurring mechanical failure class.

### 4a. CDD Self-Coherence

- **CDD α:** 4/4 — README, SELF-COHERENCE, GATE, POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT all present. CDD Trace in PR body.
- **CDD β:** 4/4 — Go types match OCaml types. CHANGELOG matches assessment. All surfaces agree on what shipped.
- **CDD γ:** 4/4 — 1 review round. 0 superseded PRs. 0 draft iterations. Immediate outputs executed.
- **Weakest axis:** none below 4
- **Action:** none

### 5. Production Verification

**Scenario:** Go `internal/pkg/` types parse the live `packages/index.json` from the repo.

**Before this release:** No Go code existed in cnos. Package restore was OCaml-only.

**After this release:** `TestReadPackageIndex` parses the live `packages/index.json` and verifies `cnos.core@3.42.0` exists with a non-empty sha256. `TestRestoreEndToEnd` proves the full flow: httptest → download → SHA-256 → extract → validate manifest → vendor path.

**How to verify:**
1. `cd go && go test ./... -v` — 13 tests pass
2. `TestReadPackageIndex` uses live repo data (not fixtures)
3. Go CI workflow green on PR and main

**Result:** Pass (via CI run on PR #206 — all 4 checks green).

### 6. CDD Closeout

| Step | Artifact | Skills loaded | Decision |
|------|----------|---------------|----------|
| 11 Observe | this assessment + PR #206 review (R1 APPROVED, 0 blockers) | post-release | Cycle coherent. First Go code ships cleanly. |
| 12 Assess | this file | post-release | C_Σ A · α A · β A · γ A · L7. MCI freeze continues (3 growing). |
| 13 Close | this assessment + next-MCA commitment | post-release | Cycle closed. |

### 7. Next Move

**Next MCA:** #192 Phase 2 — Go kernel: command registry + built-in command dispatch (or F2–F4 cleanup first)
**Owner:** Claude (author), Sigma (reviewer/releaser)
**Branch:** pending issue filing
**First AC:** TBD — depends on whether F2–F4 cleanup is separate issue or folded into Phase 2
**MCI frozen until shipped?** Yes — freeze continues (3 growing: #193, #186, #175).
**Rationale:** Phase 1 proved the Go approach. Phase 2 extends the kernel to command dispatch. Alternatively, a cleanup issue for F2–F4 could ship first as a smaller MCA to tighten the purity boundary before expanding scope.

**Closure evidence (CDD §10):**
- Immediate outputs executed: yes
  - This POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md
  - CHANGELOG TSC row
  - RELEASE.md
  - Branch cleanup (§2.6a — none to clean)
- Deferred outputs committed: yes
  - #192 Phase 2 or F2–F4 cleanup (next MCA)
  - #193 `llm` step execution (growing, 7 cycles)
  - #186 package restructuring (growing)
  - #175 CTB compiler (growing, blocked on #193)

### 8. Hub Memory

- **Daily reflection:** pending — will write after this assessment commits
- **Adhoc thread(s) updated:** pending — will update go-kernel-rewrite thread
