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

docs(P44): leadership presentation decks + Marp synthesis + README
acdl-ci / Lint (push) Successful in 7s
Details
acdl-ci / Test (push) Successful in 26s
Details
acdl-ci / Platform check-only (offline) (push) Successful in 9s
Details

Browse Source 
Add two leadership-facing presentation decks for senior leadership
(CTO, Head of Cloud, Head of Infrastructure, Head of DevOps):

1. How the Platform Works — 14 slides covering the contract-driven model,
   zero-trust, computed safety, policy enforcement, secure-by-default,
   immutable audit, HITL, observability, platform-managed environments,
   portability, and an honest shipped-vs-planned roadmap.
2. The Developer Experience — 14 slides covering two consumer surfaces,
   the 5-line contract, no platform code, versioned releases, instant
   feedback, deploy outputs, local reproducibility, friendly onboarding,
   safe promotion (one contract + per-env CI jobs), safe decommission,
   self-service module catalog, and the leadership outcome.

Each deck has two forms:
- Full markdown (source of truth) with speaker notes + mermaid code blocks
- Marp deck (lean, no speaker notes, embedded PNG diagrams) for presentation

Includes a README documenting the 3-step slide creation process:
(full markdown → Marp synthesis → PPTX export) with conventions, build
commands, and maturity framing rules.

---ci---
phase: 44
milestone: v1.9
status: complete
requirements:
  covered: []
  partial: []
---/ci---
This commit is contained in:
Jon Chery
2026-07-23 12:50:29 +00:00
parent 7cccf989b1
commit fca618916c
15 changed files with 847 additions and 5 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
docs/presentations/the-developer-experience.md
+45 -5
View File
@@ -208,14 +208,54 @@ First impressions of a platform are made **when it fails for the first time.** T
## Slide 11 — Safe Promotion Path
Promoting to a higher environment is **changing one field** — and the platform raises the bar automatically.
The contract is environment-agnostic by design. Promotion is **a workflow choice, not a contract edit** — the same contract carries cleanly from dev to qa to prod. The platform raises the bar automatically as the target environment becomes more sensitive.
**Approach A — One contract, one job per environment.** A single contract is referenced by multiple jobs in the CI workflow; the environment is passed by each job and interpolated at runtime. The contract itself never changes.
```yaml
# dev → qa: change one line
uses: acdl/pipelines/deploy.yaml@v1.6
environment: qa # QA attestation + confidence >= 0.75
# .github/workflows/deploy.yml — one job per environment, one shared contract
jobs:
dev:
uses: acdl/.github/workflows/deploy.yml@v1.6
with:
contract: .acdl/contract.yaml
environment: dev
qa:
needs: dev
uses: acdl/.github/workflows/deploy.yml@v1.6
with:
contract: .acdl/contract.yaml
environment: qa
prod:
needs: qa
uses: acdl/.github/workflows/deploy.yml@v1.6
with:
contract: .acdl/contract.yaml
environment: prod
```
**Approach B — One job per environment, environment-specific contracts.** When inputs genuinely differ per environment (different capacity, different config), each job points at its own contract file. The pipeline, policy, and confidence model stay identical.
```yaml
jobs:
dev:
uses: acdl/.github/workflows/deploy.yml@v1.6
with:
contract: .acdl/contract-dev.yaml
qa:
needs: dev
uses: acdl/.github/workflows/deploy.yml@v1.6
with:
contract: .acdl/contract-qa.yaml
prod:
needs: qa
uses: acdl/.github/workflows/deploy.yml@v1.6
with:
contract: .acdl/contract-prod.yaml
```
Whichever approach a team picks, the platform applies the same rising bar:
| Environment | What the platform adds |
|---|---|
| dev | Confidence ≥ 0.50, fully autonomous |
@@ -227,7 +267,7 @@ environment: qa # QA attestation + confidence >= 0.75
- **Separation of duties is enforced** — the QA approver cannot be the prod approver. *(Design shipped; wiring for qa/prod/dr is planned.)*
- **Timeout discipline** — 1 business day = warn + escalate; 2 business days = auto-freeze + re-submit.
> **Speaker notes:** The one-field promotion is the DX win; the automatic threshold + attestation raise is the safety win. They are the same feature. For leadership: this is how the platform makes "move fast" and "be safe" stop being a trade-off — the speed is in the ergonomics, the safety is in the gates the consumer can't bypass.
> **Speaker notes:** Promotion is a workflow choice, not a contract mutation — this matters because it means a promotion can be reviewed as a *diff in the workflow*, not as a rewritten contract. Approach A (one contract, environment passed by the job) keeps the single source of truth; Approach B (environment-specific contracts) lets teams whose inputs genuinely vary keep that variation explicit and reviewable. For leadership: the DX win is that the contract stays stable across environments; the safety win is that the platform raises the threshold and attestation bar automatically based on the target environment the job declares. The consumer can't bypass the gates — they pick *which* environment to target, and the platform applies the right bar.
---