d-bis/proxmox
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 2 Pull Requests 13 Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs: reconcile status docs; add 5-axis status vocabulary + cross-chain CREATE caveat #6

Open
nsatoshi wants to merge 1 commits from devin/1776625631-doc-reconcile-status-vocab into master
pull from: devin/1776625631-doc-reconcile-status-vocab
merge into: d-bis:master
Conversation 1 Commits 1 Files Changed 4 +135 -6
nsatoshi commented 2026-04-19 19:11:44 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Summary

Narrative-only reconciliation between the status docs under docs/11-references/ + docs/03-deployment/ and the generated artifacts they should cite. No on-chain state, no token/bridge/pool addresses, no runbooks or scripts change.

Context: the user audit flagged line 15 of DEPLOYED_TOKENS_BRIDGES_LPS_AND_ROUTING_STATUS.md as stale (claiming deployment-status.json is empty / design-only) while the submodule pin at cross-chain-pmm-lps/config/deployment-status.json actually contains cW* addresses for 9 chains. Two further Wemix docs cited in the audit (WEMIX_BRIDGE_VERIFICATION_STATUS.md, CHAIN_138_TO_WEMIX_1111_BRIDGE_COMPLETION_CHECKLIST.md) do not exist in any ref of the repo.

Included:

  • New docs/11-references/STATUS_VOCABULARY.md — five-axis grid deployed / wired / funded / explorer-verified / healthy with a legacy-term translation table.
  • New docs/11-references/CROSS_CHAIN_CREATE_ADDRESS_COINCIDENCE.md — explains why 0xD3AD6831...6f04 legitimately hosts different contracts on Chain 138 (PriceFeedKeeper, 10 748 chars) and Celo (CCIPWETH9Bridge, 13 718 chars).
  • Edit docs/11-references/DEPLOYED_TOKENS_BRIDGES_LPS_AND_ROUTING_STATUS.md lines 15–16 — drop the empty/design-only claim; cite the submodule as source of truth; enumerate actual 9-chain coverage.
  • Edit docs/03-deployment/REMAINING_DEPLOYMENTS_FOR_FULL_NETWORK_COVERAGE.md — replace Wemix row with 5-axis shorthand naming funded:N as the blocker.

Review & Testing Checklist for Human

  • Confirm the 5-axis vocabulary is acceptable.
  • Confirm the cross-chain CREATE coincidence doc captures the caveat correctly.
  • Sanity-check 9-chain cW* enumeration (1, 10, 25, 56, 100, 137, 8453, 42161, 43114).

Notes

  • Narrative-only; no validators target these files.
  • Factual basis: submodule pin cross-chain-pmm-lps @ 589ebaff86 + on-chain probes 2026-04-19 against https://138.rpc.thirdweb.com and https://forno.celo.org.
## Summary Narrative-only reconciliation between the status docs under `docs/11-references/` + `docs/03-deployment/` and the generated artifacts they should cite. No on-chain state, no token/bridge/pool addresses, no runbooks or scripts change. **Context:** the user audit flagged line 15 of `DEPLOYED_TOKENS_BRIDGES_LPS_AND_ROUTING_STATUS.md` as stale (claiming `deployment-status.json` is empty / design-only) while the submodule pin at `cross-chain-pmm-lps/config/deployment-status.json` actually contains cW* addresses for 9 chains. Two further Wemix docs cited in the audit (`WEMIX_BRIDGE_VERIFICATION_STATUS.md`, `CHAIN_138_TO_WEMIX_1111_BRIDGE_COMPLETION_CHECKLIST.md`) do not exist in any ref of the repo. Included: - New `docs/11-references/STATUS_VOCABULARY.md` — five-axis grid `deployed / wired / funded / explorer-verified / healthy` with a legacy-term translation table. - New `docs/11-references/CROSS_CHAIN_CREATE_ADDRESS_COINCIDENCE.md` — explains why `0xD3AD6831...6f04` legitimately hosts different contracts on Chain 138 (`PriceFeedKeeper`, 10 748 chars) and Celo (`CCIPWETH9Bridge`, 13 718 chars). - Edit `docs/11-references/DEPLOYED_TOKENS_BRIDGES_LPS_AND_ROUTING_STATUS.md` lines 15–16 — drop the empty/design-only claim; cite the submodule as source of truth; enumerate actual 9-chain coverage. - Edit `docs/03-deployment/REMAINING_DEPLOYMENTS_FOR_FULL_NETWORK_COVERAGE.md` — replace Wemix row with 5-axis shorthand naming `funded:N` as the blocker. ## Review & Testing Checklist for Human - [ ] Confirm the 5-axis vocabulary is acceptable. - [ ] Confirm the cross-chain CREATE coincidence doc captures the caveat correctly. - [ ] Sanity-check 9-chain cW* enumeration (`1, 10, 25, 56, 100, 137, 8453, 42161, 43114`). ### Notes - Narrative-only; no validators target these files. - Factual basis: submodule pin `cross-chain-pmm-lps @ 589ebaff86` + on-chain probes 2026-04-19 against `https://138.rpc.thirdweb.com` and `https://forno.celo.org`.
nsatoshi added 1 commit 2026-04-19 19:11:44 +00:00
docs: reconcile status docs against generated artifacts; add 5-axis status vocabulary
Some checks failed
AI Code Review / claude-review (pull_request) Failing after 37s
Details
332cbe7d93 
- New docs/11-references/STATUS_VOCABULARY.md: canonical definitions for
  'deployed / wired / funded / explorer-verified / healthy' to replace the
  ad-hoc use of 'live', 'deferred', 'tabled', 'complete' across the tree.
- New docs/11-references/CROSS_CHAIN_CREATE_ADDRESS_COINCIDENCE.md: explains
  why 0xD3AD6831...6f04 simultaneously hosts different contracts on Chain 138
  (PriceFeedKeeper), Celo (CCIPWETH9Bridge), and potentially Wemix. Same
  pattern for 0xa4B9DD...Df08. EVM CREATE address is chain-independent;
  cross-chain claim requires per-chain eth_getCode.
- DEPLOYED_TOKENS_BRIDGES_LPS_AND_ROUTING_STATUS.md line 15 was stale
  ('deployment-status.json empty (design-only)') while the submodule pin
  actually contains cW* addresses for 9 chains. Replaced with the 5-axis
  summary and a reference to the submodule as source of truth.
- REMAINING_DEPLOYMENTS_FOR_FULL_NETWORK_COVERAGE.md updated to use the
  5-axis vocabulary for the Wemix row; 'Last Updated' bumped. The
  Wemix-tabled state itself is unchanged (bridgeAvailable=false in
  deployment-status.json; WEMIX_ACQUISITION_TABLED.md still accurate).

No change to any on-chain state; no change to token/bridge/pool addresses;
no change to runbooks or scripts. Narrative-only reconciliation.

Co-Authored-By: Nakamoto, S <defi@defi-oracle.io>
gitea-actionsbot commented 2026-04-19 19:12:06 +00:00
Copy Link

Claude encountered an error —— View job

I'll analyze this and get back to you.

**Claude encountered an error** —— [View job](http://127.0.0.1:3000/d-bis/proxmox/actions/runs/124) --- I'll analyze this and get back to you.
Some checks failed
AI Code Review / claude-review (pull_request) Failing after 37s
Details
This pull request has changes conflicting with the target branch.
  • docs/03-deployment/REMAINING_DEPLOYMENTS_FOR_FULL_NETWORK_COVERAGE.md
  • docs/11-references/DEPLOYED_TOKENS_BRIDGES_LPS_AND_ROUTING_STATUS.md
View command line instructions

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.
git fetch -u origin devin/1776625631-doc-reconcile-status-vocab:devin/1776625631-doc-reconcile-status-vocab
git checkout devin/1776625631-doc-reconcile-status-vocab
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No Reviewers
Labels
No items
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
70rn4710n A.r.yavari SEG nsatoshi
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: d-bis/proxmox#6
Delete Branch "devin/1776625631-doc-reconcile-status-vocab"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?