continuous-intelligence/acdl
3
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases 128 Wiki Activity

feat(P1): Nova rebrand — docs/decks/prose/schema-$id/release-titles (REQ-155/156/157)

Browse Source 
Rebrand ACDL/Agentic Cloud Delivery Platform → Nova across README, docs/,
decks (markdown + mermaid .mmd + HTML), pyproject.toml name/description,
schema $id URLs (acdl.cloudinit.dev→nova.cloudinit.dev), release.yml
title/workflow-name. Nova tagline added to README header + both deck title
slides + docs/vision.md (alongside existing North Star, D-106). S&P theme
untouched (D-107). New docs/NOVA_MIGRATION.md consumer guide. Data values
(env vars, resource names, tag keys, SSM/consumer paths) left for P2-P4.

---ci---
project: acdl
phase: 1
milestone: v1.15
status: execute
---/ci---
This commit is contained in:
Jon Chery
2026-07-30 00:56:19 +00:00
parent 1ff942684e
commit 63f3a2b66c
57 changed files with 338 additions and 151 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
docs/presentations/the-developer-experience.md
+10 -8
View File
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# The Developer Experience
> **Subtitle:** Agentic Cloud Delivery Platform
> **Subtitle:** Nova — The New Dawn of DevSecOps
> **Audience:** Senior Leadership, CTO, Head of Cloud, Head of Infrastructure, Head of DevOps
> **Length:** ~16 minutes · 11 main + Appendix TOC + 7 appendix = 19 slides
> **Purpose:** Sell the developer experience and the citizen developer experience to tech leadership — velocity without sacrificing safety, and security/observability/compliance as platform defaults rather than per-team effort.
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
## Slide 1 — Title
**Nova — The New Dawn of DevSecOps.** Security as a seamless enabler of fast deployments — not a bottleneck, not a "no" department.
The consumer surface is intentionally tiny. The platform's surface is large and opinionated.
> **Speaker notes:** Brief introduction — this deck covers *who uses the platform and how fast/safe they ship*, not the internal mechanics (that's the companion deck). Set the frame: velocity without sacrificing safety, and security/observability/compliance as platform defaults rather than per-team effort.
@@ -28,7 +30,7 @@ flowchart LR
A["Technical dev\n(app code + contract)"]
B["Citizen dev\n(intent → AI agent\n→ contract)"]
end
subgraph ACDL ["ACDL — infrastructure only"]
subgraph ACDL ["Nova — infrastructure only"]
C["Same contract\nSame pipeline\nSame safety"]
D["Provision\nAWS resources"]
E["Evidence\nhash-chained"]
@@ -47,10 +49,10 @@ flowchart LR
- **Technical developer** — owns app code + a contract + a thin CI definition.
- **Citizen developer** — declares intent in plain language; an AI agent produces a contract that passes the **same** safety envelope.
- **Upstream is anything** — IDE, agentic SDLC, or vibe coding. ACDL doesn't care how the contract was produced.
- **ACDL is infrastructure only** — it provisions and governs AWS resources. Application deployment is upstream.
- **Upstream is anything** — IDE, agentic SDLC, or vibe coding. Nova doesn't care how the contract was produced.
- **Nova is infrastructure only** — it provisions and governs AWS resources. Application deployment is upstream.
> **Speaker notes:** This is the thesis of the deck. The two surfaces are *parallel*, not a progression — a citizen developer doesn't "graduate" to the developer surface. Both produce a contract; both get the same treatment. The scope boundary matters: anything upstream of the contract is out of ACDL's concern. The leadership takeaway: we expand who can ship safely without lowering the bar.
> **Speaker notes:** This is the thesis of the deck. The two surfaces are *parallel*, not a progression — a citizen developer doesn't "graduate" to the developer surface. Both produce a contract; both get the same treatment. The scope boundary matters: anything upstream of the contract is out of Nova's concern. The leadership takeaway: we expand who can ship safely without lowering the bar.
---
@@ -66,7 +68,7 @@ flowchart TD
U2["Citizen dev\nintent → AI agent → contract"]
end
subgraph ACDL ["ACDL — infrastructure only"]
subgraph ACDL ["Nova — infrastructure only"]
direction TB
CS["Contract schema\n(validate + fail-fast)"]
subgraph PIPE ["Central pipeline — fixed stages, every deployment"]
@@ -364,7 +366,7 @@ Consumers `uses:` a **versioned** central workflow. The platform fetches itself
flowchart LR
A["Consumer repo<br/>app + contract + 'uses:'"] -->|triggers on push to main| B["Platform runner"]
B -->|checks out the consumer repo| A
B -->|checks out the ACDL platform repo<br/>into the workspace| C["Platform code<br/>(modules, adapters, schemas)"]
B -->|checks out the Nova platform repo<br/>into the workspace| C["Platform code<br/>(modules, adapters, schemas)"]
C --> B
B -->|runs the pipeline against<br/>the consumer's contract| D["Consumer's resources in AWS"]
```
@@ -426,7 +428,7 @@ flowchart LR
## A6 — Operating Model & Cost
ACDL runs at **zero cloud cost** for day-to-day development. The v1.0→v1.10 AWS spend was measured directly via Cost Explorer (`COST.md`, 2026-07-28):
Nova runs at **zero cloud cost** for day-to-day development. The v1.0→v1.10 AWS spend was measured directly via Cost Explorer (`COST.md`, 2026-07-28):
| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|