The confirmation review could not tie "the owner made a check on real
printers a condition" to anything written down. The record now states
the condition itself, so approving the record approves the condition.
Figures are tied to the cited commit instead of a local date, and the
index row separates its two requirements with a comma like the others.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: James Maes <james@kof22.com>
An independent review of the record found it wrong in four places:
- it said the assembly is gated at 90%, while the gate today is 73 and
90 is the bar 2.0.0 must reach before release;
- it did not list K22-CODE-CS-11, which is not met in part;
- it stated two plans as the current state (exclusions in the Windows
assembly, and verification as if it ran in CI);
- its expiry named the release the exception exists for.
The wording changes what is being accepted, so the status goes back to
proposed until the maintainer approves the corrected text. The evidence
link is pinned to a commit.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: James Maes <james@kof22.com>
K22-TEST-10 asks for 100% line coverage of UI-free application logic.
Version 2.0 of QRun-IO/qqq-print-agent gates its Windows adapter layer at
90% and its Core, view-model and command-line assemblies at 100%. The
owner chose that target on 2026-11-10; this entry records the deviation,
its reason, risk, compensating controls and end date. It is proposed, not
approved: merging this pull request is the approval.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: James Maes <james@kof22.com>
james.maesandClaude Fable 5.2