Skip to content

[25/36] Add OC-130 protocol layout stability task - #62

Open
cjohnsto-nz wants to merge 2 commits into
supervisor/add-preview-zoom-rotate-taskfrom
supervisor/add-protocol-layout-stability-task
Open

[25/36] Add OC-130 protocol layout stability task#62
cjohnsto-nz wants to merge 2 commits into
supervisor/add-preview-zoom-rotate-taskfrom
supervisor/add-protocol-layout-stability-task

Conversation

@cjohnsto-nz

@cjohnsto-nz cjohnsto-nz commented Jun 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

Adds the supervisor planning task for protocol-native first paint and layout stability across HTTP, GraphQL, WebSocket, and gRPC request editors.

Ownership

Stack

Validation

@cjohnsto-nz
cjohnsto-nz force-pushed the supervisor/add-preview-zoom-rotate-task branch from 365910d to ad883f2 Compare June 15, 2026 07:51
@cjohnsto-nz
cjohnsto-nz force-pushed the supervisor/add-protocol-layout-stability-task branch from bea1457 to d014b8f Compare June 15, 2026 07:51
@cjohnsto-nz cjohnsto-nz changed the title [23/27] Add OC-130 protocol layout stability task [25/36] Add OC-130 protocol layout stability task Jun 15, 2026
@APKiwi

APKiwi commented Jul 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Verdict: approve. Referenced host symbols (_getHtml, _sendDocumentToWebview, resolveCustomTextEditor, requestLoaded, ready) match the implementation PR's actual touch-points, and the doc correctly allows the neutral-shell alternative the implementation took, so no doc/impl contradiction.

@cjohnsto-nz

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

The approval is accepted. No source change belongs on this planning branch.

PR #62 defines OC-130’s first-paint/layout-stability contract. The implementation is owned by PR #59 (feature/oc-130-protocol-layout-stability), beginning at 1dbc25d; that branch takes the task’s allowed neutral-shell approach and records completion at 4030efd.

I corrected the PR body’s malformed \npm validation entries and made the base, head, immediate child, and implementation ownership explicit. Moving implementation into this branch would duplicate PR #59 and create unnecessary stack overlap.

GitHub reports PR #62 and immediate child PR #58 as MERGEABLE/CLEAN with all checks passing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants