oceanbase / oceanbase/powercontext
Tracking Issue: Development Context and Scope Model
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 1.1k
- Forks
- 212
- Avg merge
- 1d 11h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 199
Description
Goal
Track the design and follow-up work needed to define how Project, Workstream, Session, and scope relate across PowerContext.
PowerContext originally used a project-derived scope_id to share context across Sessions. Handoff later used the same scope as the identity of one linear Workstream. This assumption does not cover projects with parallel work or development spanning multiple projects.
RFC required
Implementation requires a new RFC that defines:
- Project, Workstream, Session, and scope semantics;
- their relationships and identity boundaries;
- scope granularity for Memory, Handoff, Statistics, and other Runtime capabilities;
- whether
project_idremains a separate identity; - compatibility expectations for the API, CLI, integrations, and existing data.
The RFC should decide the model and invariants without fixing detailed user-flow orchestration prematurely.
Tracking
- Draft and review the RFC.
- Record the accepted identity and scope model.
- Reconcile affected existing RFCs, including RFC 0019, RFC 0048, and RFC 0082.
- Create follow-up issues for API, CLI, Codex integration, Dashboard, and Handoff Report work.
- Implement changes only after the RFC is accepted.
Constraints
- Preserve shared project context across Sessions.
- Keep independent Workstream histories isolated.
- Do not equate Session with Workstream.
- Do not assume the current
project_idmodel is final. - Treat migration and detailed orchestration as follow-up work.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing RFC 0019, RFC 0048, and RFC 0082, then map the current Project, Workstream, Session, and scope assumptions described in this issue. Done means a reviewed RFC records the identity and scope model, reconciles affected RFCs, and lists follow-up issues for API, CLI, Codex integration, Dashboard, and Handoff Report work.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- backend-api-design
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Clearly specified
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100