CODECHECK compatibility inquiry for OBL-006 ReproductionEvidence

# CODECHECK Compatibility Inquiry For OBL-006 ReproductionEvidence

Would CODECHECK be an appropriate route for an independent execution check of a
Rust/Lean reproduction target supporting the `ReproductionEvidence` row for
OBL-006 in the finite-capacity causal-network spacetime project?

This is a compatibility inquiry, not a certificate request yet. The theorem
target is not physically proved. I am not asking for endorsement of the theorem,
the model, or a physical claim about nature. The intended check would be an
attributable clean-checkout execution record against an exact target.

Target facts:

- target tag: `obl-006-external-target-v12`
- target checkout: `1f7140774eedf2d07681de242a8ed723d1f70310`
- source archive SHA-256: `e774ae8cbeb4d7e301115351a6e1250d1c91386b4f445c66ff5ce0ab9a4b7296`
- benchmark id: `CapacityThresholdCausalConeEscape-v1`

Current access/publication state:

- The repository is currently private.
- The approved access route is a verified target archive out of band.
- No public mirror/archive has been approved.
- No public preprint/manuscript locator exists yet.

Before opening a normal community CODECHECK register issue, I need to know:

1. Can a private verified source archive, supplied out of band with the SHA-256
above, satisfy the CODECHECK community issue template `Repository` field?
2. If not, is the minimal acceptable next step a public mirror/archive under the
codecheckers organization, a public project archive, or a public repository?
3. Can the OBL-006 theorem/intake documents serve as the initial `Workflow`
context before a public preprint or manuscript exists?
4. If a public manuscript/preprint is required first, what minimum workflow
locator should be prepared before a proper CODECHECK request?

Preferred deterministic command:

```bash
make obl006-reproduction-check
```

If Lake is not on `PATH`:

```bash
make obl006-reproduction-check LAKE=/path/to/lake
```

If this route is appropriate, the eventual `ReproductionEvidence` packet would
need:

- target checkout;
- durable external certificate/report/log locator;
- codechecker identity;
- positive externality attestation;
- clean-checkout environment;
- full command transcript;
- result hashes or durable logs;
- local-modification statement;
- fail-closed frontier flags after reproduction;
- forbidden-proxy rejection;
- ontology shortcut-boundary closure;
- proposed manifest row text with concrete key-value packet values.

Non-promotion boundary:

- This issue is correspondence only.
- It is not external evidence.
- It is not a manifest row.
- It does not close OBL-006.
- It does not prove the physical theorem.
- Even a later successful `ReproductionEvidence` row remains non-promoting
until `ContinuumBridgeReview`, `EmpiricalRecoveryReview`,
`ReproductionEvidence`, and `DiscriminatingPredictionBenchmark` are all
accepted together on one shared target checkout.