UX to model feedback loops at other scales?

Currently, mindstream is designed around a feedback loop at a certain scale -- modifications of a buffer at natural bounding points (a kind of ["Poincare section"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincar%C3%A9_map) of the user's flow).

But there are smaller feedback loops (expression-level, REPL interactions, or Vim-like semantic edit commands) and larger ones (rebuilding and testing the whole project across multiple files and directories) and still-larger ones (deploying working code to production) that have the same Poincare-section-like cyclic quality.

Can a meaningful UX be designed that would usefully scale up and down in this respect, which might naturally subsume existing development workflows?

At a minimum, this would entail decoupling the notion of "session" from changes to a specific buffer. We could potentially use Git branches to model iteration at different scales (e.g. one branch for changes in any project buffer (i.e. current Mindstream behavior), and another "develop" branch that tracks changes at the normal level used in Git repos, viz. semantically connected changes across many files, and another "main" branch that tracks "deployed" code).