rfc(v4): promote RFC-001 / RFC-002 (v1 core) / RFC-004 from Proposed to Accepted

[Davincc77]

Summary

Applies the V4 Acceptance Checklist (docs/rfcs/ACCEPTANCE_CHECKLIST_V4.md §3 C1–C16) to the three P0 RFCs that gate v4 GA normative work. Promotes:

• RFC-001 media_profile v1 — Proposed → Accepted
• RFC-002 verification_gates + human_veto — v1 core only Proposed → Accepted. v2 §8b additions (claim_status, contract_tests, success_criteria, reversibility, blast_radius, verification_artifacts, error_journal[].rule_created, extended claim_sources.records[]) stay Draft per the RFC's status note.
• RFC-004 Migration & Backward Compatibility — Proposed → Accepted

Acceptance is docs-only. No SDK, schema, vector, envelope, AAD, KDF, or crypto change. No npm / PyPI / Zenodo / IANA publish. No tag, no release, no announcement. Production-recommended format remains v3.5.1; preview track remains v4.0.0-preview.1.

This unblocks the v4 GA P0 chantiers in docs/roadmap/ROAD-TO-V4-GA.md §2.1 (P0-1 SPEC normative v4, P0-2 strict JSON Schema, P0-3 Python SDK, P0-4 JS/TS SDK, P0-5 reference migrator, P0-6 strict vectors), per §4 step 3 and §5 step 4.

Acceptance evidence — C1–C16 per RFC

#	Criterion	RFC-001	RFC-002 v1 core	RFC-004
C1	RFC 2119 language explicit (MUST/SHOULD/MAY uppercased, normative vs illustrative distinguished)	✅ §3 forward-compat, §4 decisions, §5 field rules, §6 V-001..V-012, §7, §8	✅ §3, §4, §6, §7, §8	✅ §3, §4, §6, §7, §8
C2	No TBD / TODO in normative sections; open decisions in dedicated §, tagged non-blocking	✅ §11 open questions explicit	✅ §10 open questions explicit; §8b explicitly Draft and additive	✅ §12 open decisions explicit
C3	Status block reflects reality (Accepted only after merge)	✅ Block updated in same PR, takes effect on merge	✅ Block updated, v2 §8b stays Draft	✅ Block updated on merge
C4	Frozen surface enumerated in status note	✅ §4 decisions, §5 illustrative schema, §6 V-001..V-012, §9 error codes	✅ Five gate levels (§6), human_veto_policy, claim_sources v1, error_journal, risk_thresholds, preflight_checks, §4 decisions, §9 G-001..G-006	✅ §3 sub-principles, §4 decisions, §5.4 staged pipeline, §6 reader-vs-writer matrix, §7 legacy/unknown/x_*, §8 rollback
C5	Out-of-scope additions explicit (no silent expansion at Accepted)	✅ §2 out-of-scope, §10 future work, §11 open questions	✅ §8b v2 sections explicitly remain Draft; status note names every v2 field staying Draft	✅ §2 out-of-scope, §12 open decisions
C6	Dependencies on other RFCs stated; depended-on RFCs ≥ Proposed	✅ No hard RFC dep; cross-refs RFC-002 §7, RFC-004 §9	✅ Envelope bump shared with RFC-001 (§3); §8 ethics interaction noted	✅ §9 references RFC-001, RFC-002, RFC-003 — RFC-001 & RFC-002 v1 core co-promoted in this PR
C7	SCHEMA_INDEX.md consistent	✅ Preview schema table unchanged (no normative schema added); v4 preview track row still accurate. No edit required.	✅ Same.	✅ Same.
C8	docs/rfcs/README.md consistent	✅ Index row updated to Accepted (2026-05-24)	✅ Index row updated to Accepted (v1 core, 2026-05-24) · Draft (v2 §8b)	✅ Index row updated to Accepted (2026-05-24)
C9	CHANGELOG.md docs-only entry added	✅ New 2026-05-24 block under Unreleased	✅ Same entry	✅ Same entry
C10	At least one non-normative example exists or is referenced	✅ examples/media_profile-v1.example.json + examples/v4-media-test-pack/	✅ examples/verification_gates-v1.example.json + v4-media-test-pack project-*.verification_gates.json	✅ §5.1 migration_report sample shape (checklist §3.4 explicitly accepts this for RFC-004)
C11	Open decisions section preserved verbatim	✅ §11 unchanged	✅ §10 unchanged	✅ §12 unchanged
C12	No locked_* change	✅ Out of scope; §8.8 keeps Soul Handoff locked_* untouched	✅ §8 explicitly forbids using gates to weaken ethics.locked_actions	✅ §4 decision #10 escalates to require-owner for consent_change / identity_assertion; no locked_* mutation
C13	No unknown-field-preservation regression	✅ V-010 mandates verbatim preservation of x_*	✅ G-005 mandates round-trip preservation of x_* action classes; §3 forward-compat requires ignore (not delete)	✅ §3.1 lossless-by-default, §4 decision #5 ("Unknown fields are kept, not stripped"), §7 verbatim preservation
C14	No publish trigger (no workflow / tag / CI step that publishes)	✅ Docs-only diff; no workflow change	✅ Same	✅ Same
C15	Maintainer sign-off requested	⏳ Awaiting Accept comment from @Davincc77 referencing this checklist	⏳ Same	⏳ Same
C16	CI is green	⏳ Awaiting test-vectors + verify-npm-preview on the head commit	⏳ Same	⏳ Same

Substance verdict (C1–C14): ✅ all RFCs pass on substance.
Procedural items (C15, C16): awaiting maintainer sign-off and CI run on the head commit — both are the responsibility of the reviewer / CI, not the PR author.

Files changed (6, docs-only)

• docs/rfcs/RFC-001-media-profile-v1.md — status block Proposed → Accepted + status note rewritten to point at the acceptance checklist.
• docs/rfcs/RFC-002-verification-gates.md — status block updated to Accepted (v1 core) · Draft (v2 additions); status note rewritten; v2 §8b explicitly stays Draft.
• docs/rfcs/RFC-004-migration-backward-compatibility.md — status block Proposed → Accepted + status note rewritten.
• docs/rfcs/README.md — RFC index table updated (RFC-001, RFC-002 v1 core, RFC-004 → Accepted 2026-05-24); promotion note updated.
• CHANGELOG.md — new 2026-05-24 — RFC-001 / RFC-002 (v1 core) / RFC-004 promoted Proposed → Accepted block under Unreleased — docs-only.
• docs/roadmap/ROAD-TO-V4-GA.md — §0 RFC-status bullet updated; §5 next-PR sequence updated (steps 1–3 now done, step 4 SPEC normative is unblocked).

What does NOT change

• ❌ No schema file touched (schema/, schemas/).
• ❌ No SDK code touched (packages/pypi/klickd, packages/@klickd/core).
• ❌ No test vector touched (tests/).
• ❌ No envelope / AAD / KDF / crypto change.
• ❌ No package version bump.
• ❌ No npm / PyPI / Zenodo / IANA action.
• ❌ No tag, no release, no GitHub Release.
• ❌ No public announcement.
• v3.5.1 remains the production-recommended format.
• v4.0.0-preview.1 remains the only preview release with permissive schemas.
• RFC-003 stays Draft (pending P1-3 benchmark execution).
• RFC-002 §8b v2 additions stay Draft (may still iterate).
• RFC-006 / RFC-007 / RFC-008 stay Draft (post-GA).

Test plan

• CI test-vectors green on head commit (no vector changed; should be a trivial pass).
• CI verify-npm-preview green on head commit (no package change; trivial pass).
• Reviewer reads the C1–C16 evidence table above and either marks each box ✅ or blocks merge with a specific failing item.
• Reviewer confirms the diff touches only the 6 docs files listed above and no schema / SDK / vector / workflow file.
• @Davincc77 leaves an explicit Accept comment referencing docs/rfcs/ACCEPTANCE_CHECKLIST_V4.md (C15).

Merge recommendation

Merge once C15 (maintainer Accept comment) and C16 (CI green) are satisfied. All other 14 criteria pass on substance with evidence in the table above.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[Davincc77]

Audit indépendant — C1–C16 vérifiés ($(date -u +%Y-%m-%d))

Audit re-passé indépendamment sur la branche rfc-v4-promote-accepted contre docs/rfcs/ACCEPTANCE_CHECKLIST_V4.md §3. Aucune divergence trouvée avec la table d'évidence du body de PR.

Substance (C1–C14) — ✅ verts pour les trois RFCs

• C1 (RFC 2119) — RFC-001 §3/§4/§5/§6, RFC-002 §3/§4/§6, RFC-004 §3/§4/§6 contiennent des MUST/SHOULD/MAY explicites et distinguent normatif vs illustratif.
• C2 (pas de TBD/TODO) — grep -rn 'TBD\|TODO\|FIXME' sur docs/rfcs/ ne renvoie que l'occurrence pédagogique dans le checklist lui-même. Sections "Open questions / Open decisions" présentes et marquées non-bloquantes (§11 RFC-001, §10 RFC-002, §12 RFC-004).
• C3 — Status blocks mis à jour en cohérence avec la PR (effet au merge).
• C4 (surface gelée énumérée) — chaque status note nomme explicitement les sections frozen.
• C5 (out-of-scope explicite) — RFC-002 §8b v2 reste Draft, RFC-001 §10 future work, RFC-004 §2 out-of-scope.
• C6 (dépendances) — envelope klickd_version: "4.0" partagé RFC-001/002 ; RFC-004 §9 référence RFC-001/002 (co-promues dans cette PR).
• C7 (SCHEMA_INDEX.md) — vérifié : SCHEMA_INDEX.md documente déjà preview = non-normatif / permissif ; aucune mise à jour requise puisque Accepted ne change pas la nature schéma (seul Implemented le ferait via P0-2).
• C8 (docs/rfcs/README.md) — table d'index correctement mise à jour.
• C9 (CHANGELOG.md) — entrée 2026-05-24 sous Unreleased — docs-only présente.
• C10 (exemples non-normatifs) — fichiers présents : docs/rfcs/examples/media_profile-v1.example.json, verification_gates-v1.example.json, v4-media-test-pack/. Pour RFC-004, §5.1 migration_report shape — autorisé par le checklist §3.4 ("For RFC-004, 'example' = a sample migration_report shape, not a real migrated file.").
• C11 (open decisions préservées) — diff confirme : §11 RFC-001 / §10 RFC-002 / §12 RFC-004 inchangées.
• C12 (pas de locked_*) — grep -rn 'locked_' ne renvoie que des références descriptives (RFC-002 §8 interdit d'affaiblir ethics.locked_actions ; RFC-004 §5.3 mentionne ethics.locked_actions dans une heuristique de détection de version). Aucune mutation.
• C13 (préservation champs inconnus) — RFC-001 V-010, RFC-002 G-005, RFC-004 §3.1 + §4 décision docs(rfc): RFC-002 v2 draft — claim grounding + contract tests (v4-B, additive) #5 + §7 — toutes intactes.
• C14 (pas de publish trigger) — diff inspecté : aucun fichier .github/workflows/, aucun package.json/pyproject.toml/.zenodo.json/CITATION.cff touché.

Procédural (C15–C16)

• C16 (CI verte) — ✅ les trois checks (Python cross-impl, JS hash-wasm Argon2id, @klickd/core integrity) passent sur le head commit.
• C15 (sign-off mainteneur) — ⏳ uniquement Vince peut cocher cette case. Un agent autonome ne peut pas auto-valider une promotion Proposed → Accepted (locked rule § gouvernance).

Verdict

PR docs-only, substance prête au merge. Pas de SDK / schéma / vector / publish / tag / version bump. Le seul item restant est l'Accept explicite de @Davincc77 référençant le checklist (C15).

Prochaine étape recommandée (post-merge)

Une fois cette PR mergée (sur décision Vince), démarrer P0-1 — SPEC normative v4 (docs/roadmap/ROAD-TO-V4-GA.md §2.1) via une nouvelle PR docs-first : « spec(v4): begin promoting §33 preview wording toward normative ». Garder la règle §3.10 "Doc d'abord" — la PR de doc précède le code.

— Audit autonome (relecture indépendante, aucune modification proposée).