johno/beads
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

bd sync: 2025-10-31 20:15:58

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Steve Yegge
2025-10-31 20:15:58 -07:00
parent 7d73082d7e
commit c460d00861
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
.beads/beads.jsonl
View File

@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@
{"id":"bd-69fbe98e","content_hash":"b9211785e5423ab62d313590115309dab023b0c418b8d06f8bf98442c1ff740d","title":"Implement \"bd daemons logs\" subcommand","description":"Add command to view daemon logs for a specific workspace. Requires daemon logging to file (may need separate issue for log infrastructure).","status":"open","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-26T19:41:11.099659-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.186556-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-6ada971e","content_hash":"3979df7395526a6796508aa1ed1e89c4fedc46ee5c2b79dd85066c8a78c8487a","title":"Create cmd/bd/daemon_event_loop.go (~200 LOC)","description":"Implement runEventDrivenLoop to replace polling ticker. Coordinate FileWatcher, mutation events, debouncer. Include health check ticker (60s) for daemon validation.","status":"closed","priority":1,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-28T16:20:02.429383-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.220612-07:00","closed_at":"2025-10-28T12:30:44.067036-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-6bebe013","content_hash":"80a473ecbec089a83cb325346eb851661d0fe35a25c6d73fb92827abcfa36267","title":"Rapid 1","description":"","status":"open","priority":3,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-29T19:11:57.404437-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.189046-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-6d7efe32","content_hash":"40b55f82509b9642dfa4a71a749e39183024f5a6347ffdc3bc49050e5279058a","title":"CRDT-based architecture for guaranteed convergence (v2.0)","description":"## Vision\nRedesign beads around Conflict-Free Replicated Data Types (CRDTs) to provide mathematical guarantees for N-way collision resolution at arbitrary scale.\n\n## Current Limitations\n- Content-hash based collision resolution fails at 5+ clones\n- Non-deterministic convergence in multi-round scenarios\n- UNIQUE constraint violations during rename operations\n- No formal proof of convergence properties\n\n## CRDT Benefits\n- Provably convergent (Strong Eventual Consistency)\n- Commutative/Associative/Idempotent operations\n- No coordination required between clones\n- Scales to 100+ concurrent workers\n- Well-understood mathematical foundations\n\n## Proposed Architecture\n\n### 1. UUID-Based IDs\nReplace sequential IDs with UUIDs:\n- Current: bd-1c63eb84, bd-9063acda, bd-4d80b7b1\n- CRDT: bd-a1b2c3d4-e5f6-7890-abcd-ef1234567890\n- Human aliases maintained separately: #42 maps to UUID\n\n### 2. Last-Write-Wins (LWW) Elements\nEach field becomes an LWW register:\n- title: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- status: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- Deterministic conflict resolution via Lamport timestamp + clone_id tiebreaker\n\n### 3. Operation Log\nTrack all operations as CRDT ops:\n- CREATE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id, fields)\n- UPDATE(uuid, field, timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- DELETE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id) - tombstone, not hard delete\n\n### 4. Sync as Merge\nSyncing becomes merging two CRDT states:\n- No merge conflicts possible\n- Deterministic merge function\n- Guaranteed convergence\n\n## Implementation Phases\n\n### Phase 1: Research \u0026 Design (4 weeks)\n- Study existing CRDT implementations (Automerge, Yjs, Loro)\n- Design schema for CRDT-based issue tracking\n- Prototype LWW-based Issue CRDT\n- Benchmark performance vs current system\n\n### Phase 2: Parallel Implementation (6 weeks)\n- Implement CRDT storage layer alongside SQLite\n- Build conversion tools: SQLite ↔ CRDT\n- Maintain backward compatibility with v1.x format\n- Migration path for existing databases\n\n### Phase 3: Testing \u0026 Validation (4 weeks)\n- Formal verification of convergence properties\n- Stress testing with 100+ clone scenario\n- Performance profiling and optimization\n- Documentation and examples\n\n### Phase 4: Migration \u0026 Rollout (4 weeks)\n- Release v2.0-beta with CRDT backend\n- Gradual migration from v1.x\n- Monitoring and bug fixes\n- Final v2.0 release\n\n## Risks \u0026 Mitigations\n\n**Risk 1: Performance overhead**\n- Mitigation: Benchmark early, optimize hot paths\n- CRDTs can be slower than append-only logs\n- May need compaction strategy\n\n**Risk 2: Storage bloat**\n- Mitigation: Implement operation log compaction\n- Tombstone garbage collection for deleted issues\n- Periodic snapshots to reduce log size\n\n**Risk 3: Breaking changes**\n- Mitigation: Maintain v1.x compatibility layer\n- Gradual migration tools\n- Dual-mode operation during transition\n\n**Risk 4: Complexity**\n- Mitigation: Use battle-tested CRDT libraries\n- Comprehensive documentation\n- Clear migration guide\n\n## Success Criteria\n- 100-clone collision test passes without failures\n- Formal proof of convergence properties\n- Performance within 2x of current system\n- Zero manual conflict resolution required\n- Backward compatible with v1.x databases\n\n## Timeline\n18-20 weeks total (4-5 months)\n\n## References\n- Automerge: https://automerge.org\n- Yjs: https://docs.yjs.dev\n- Loro: https://loro.dev\n- CRDT theory: Shapiro et al, A comprehensive study of CRDTs\n- Related issues: bd-e6d71828, bd-7a2b58fc, bd-81abb639","status":"open","priority":3,"issue_type":"feature","created_at":"2025-10-29T20:48:00.267237-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.195395-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-6d7efe32","content_hash":"40b55f82509b9642dfa4a71a749e39183024f5a6347ffdc3bc49050e5279058a","title":"CRDT-based architecture for guaranteed convergence (v2.0)","description":"## Vision\nRedesign beads around Conflict-Free Replicated Data Types (CRDTs) to provide mathematical guarantees for N-way collision resolution at arbitrary scale.\n\n## Current Limitations\n- Content-hash based collision resolution fails at 5+ clones\n- Non-deterministic convergence in multi-round scenarios\n- UNIQUE constraint violations during rename operations\n- No formal proof of convergence properties\n\n## CRDT Benefits\n- Provably convergent (Strong Eventual Consistency)\n- Commutative/Associative/Idempotent operations\n- No coordination required between clones\n- Scales to 100+ concurrent workers\n- Well-understood mathematical foundations\n\n## Proposed Architecture\n\n### 1. UUID-Based IDs\nReplace sequential IDs with UUIDs:\n- Current: bd-1c63eb84, bd-9063acda, bd-4d80b7b1\n- CRDT: bd-a1b2c3d4-e5f6-7890-abcd-ef1234567890\n- Human aliases maintained separately: #42 maps to UUID\n\n### 2. Last-Write-Wins (LWW) Elements\nEach field becomes an LWW register:\n- title: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- status: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- Deterministic conflict resolution via Lamport timestamp + clone_id tiebreaker\n\n### 3. Operation Log\nTrack all operations as CRDT ops:\n- CREATE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id, fields)\n- UPDATE(uuid, field, timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- DELETE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id) - tombstone, not hard delete\n\n### 4. Sync as Merge\nSyncing becomes merging two CRDT states:\n- No merge conflicts possible\n- Deterministic merge function\n- Guaranteed convergence\n\n## Implementation Phases\n\n### Phase 1: Research \u0026 Design (4 weeks)\n- Study existing CRDT implementations (Automerge, Yjs, Loro)\n- Design schema for CRDT-based issue tracking\n- Prototype LWW-based Issue CRDT\n- Benchmark performance vs current system\n\n### Phase 2: Parallel Implementation (6 weeks)\n- Implement CRDT storage layer alongside SQLite\n- Build conversion tools: SQLite ↔ CRDT\n- Maintain backward compatibility with v1.x format\n- Migration path for existing databases\n\n### Phase 3: Testing \u0026 Validation (4 weeks)\n- Formal verification of convergence properties\n- Stress testing with 100+ clone scenario\n- Performance profiling and optimization\n- Documentation and examples\n\n### Phase 4: Migration \u0026 Rollout (4 weeks)\n- Release v2.0-beta with CRDT backend\n- Gradual migration from v1.x\n- Monitoring and bug fixes\n- Final v2.0 release\n\n## Risks \u0026 Mitigations\n\n**Risk 1: Performance overhead**\n- Mitigation: Benchmark early, optimize hot paths\n- CRDTs can be slower than append-only logs\n- May need compaction strategy\n\n**Risk 2: Storage bloat**\n- Mitigation: Implement operation log compaction\n- Tombstone garbage collection for deleted issues\n- Periodic snapshots to reduce log size\n\n**Risk 3: Breaking changes**\n- Mitigation: Maintain v1.x compatibility layer\n- Gradual migration tools\n- Dual-mode operation during transition\n\n**Risk 4: Complexity**\n- Mitigation: Use battle-tested CRDT libraries\n- Comprehensive documentation\n- Clear migration guide\n\n## Success Criteria\n- 100-clone collision test passes without failures\n- Formal proof of convergence properties\n- Performance within 2x of current system\n- Zero manual conflict resolution required\n- Backward compatible with v1.x databases\n\n## Timeline\n18-20 weeks total (4-5 months)\n\n## References\n- Automerge: https://automerge.org\n- Yjs: https://docs.yjs.dev\n- Loro: https://loro.dev\n- CRDT theory: Shapiro et al, A comprehensive study of CRDTs\n- Related issues: bd-e6d71828, bd-7a2b58fc, bd-81abb639","status":"closed","priority":3,"issue_type":"feature","created_at":"2025-10-29T20:48:00.267237-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-31T20:06:44.604643-07:00","closed_at":"2025-10-31T20:06:44.604643-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-6fe4622f","content_hash":"d0d8e0634aea5e60373d339b363d7601af5d42d0f90780a54a4978c3e39ca747","title":"Remove unreachable utility functions","description":"Several small utility functions are unreachable:\n\nFiles to clean:\n1. `internal/storage/sqlite/hash.go` - `computeIssueContentHash` (line 17)\n - Check if entire file can be deleted if only contains this function\n\n2. `internal/config/config.go` - `FileUsed` (line 151)\n - Delete unused config helper\n\n3. `cmd/bd/git_sync_test.go` - `verifyIssueOpen` (line 300)\n - Delete dead test helper\n\n4. `internal/compact/haiku.go` - `HaikuClient.SummarizeTier2` (line 81)\n - Tier 2 summarization not implemented\n - Options: implement feature OR delete method\n\nImpact: Removes 50-100 LOC depending on decisions","acceptance_criteria":"- Remove unreachable functions\n- If entire files can be deleted (like hash.go), delete them\n- For SummarizeTier2: decide to implement or delete, document decision\n- All tests pass: `go test ./...`\n- Verify no callers exist for each function","status":"open","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-28T16:20:02.434573-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.224957-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-70419816","content_hash":"1ee07b713143f1abcc3c8189ae49a41e34669822a1843fe1ca823c5f69af4494","title":"Export deduplication breaks when JSONL and export_hashes table diverge","description":"## Problem\n\nThe export deduplication feature (timestamp-only skipping) breaks when the JSONL file and export_hashes table get out of sync, causing exports to skip issues that aren't actually in the file.\n\n## Symptoms\n\n- `bd export` reports \"Skipped 128 issue(s) with timestamp-only changes\"\n- JSONL file only has 38 lines but DB has 149 issues\n- export_hashes table has 149 entries\n- Auto-import doesn't trigger (hash matches despite missing data)\n- Two repos on same commit show different issue counts\n\n## Root Cause\n\nshouldSkipExport() in autoflush.go compares current issue hash with stored export_hashes entry. If they match, it skips export assuming the issue is already in the JSONL.\n\nThis assumption fails when:\n1. Git operations (pull, reset, checkout) change JSONL without clearing export_hashes\n2. Manual JSONL edits or corruption\n3. Import operations that modify DB but don't update export_hashes\n4. Partial exports that update export_hashes but don't complete\n\n## Impact\n\n- **Critical data loss risk**: Issues appear to be tracked but aren't persisted to git\n- Breaks multi-repo sync (root cause of today's debugging session)\n- Auto-import fails to detect staleness (hash matches despite missing data)\n- Silent data corruption (no error messages, just missing issues)\n\n## Reproduction\n\n1. Have DB with 149 issues, all in export_hashes table\n2. Truncate JSONL to 38 lines (simulate git reset or corruption)\n3. Run `bd export` - it skips 128 issues\n4. JSONL still has only 38 lines but export thinks it succeeded\n\n## Current Workaround\n\n```bash\nsqlite3 .beads/beads.db \"DELETE FROM export_hashes\"\nbd export -o .beads/beads.jsonl\n```\n\n## Proposed Solutions\n\n**Option 1: Verify JSONL integrity before skipping**\n- Count lines in JSONL, compare with export_hashes count\n- If mismatch, clear export_hashes and force full export\n- Safe but adds I/O overhead\n\n**Option 2: Hash-based JSONL validation**\n- Store hash of entire JSONL file in metadata\n- Before export, check if JSONL hash matches\n- If mismatch, clear export_hashes\n- More efficient, detects any JSONL corruption\n\n**Option 3: Disable timestamp-only deduplication**\n- Remove the feature entirely\n- Always export all issues\n- Simplest and safest, but creates larger git commits\n\n**Option 4: Clear export_hashes on git operations**\n- Add post-merge hook to clear export_hashes\n- Clear on any import operation\n- Defensive approach but may over-clear\n\n## Recommended Fix\n\nCombination of Options 2 + 4:\n1. Store JSONL file hash in metadata after export\n2. Check hash before export, clear export_hashes if mismatch \n3. Clear export_hashes on import operations\n4. Add `bd validate` check for JSONL/export_hashes sync\n\n## Files Involved\n\n- cmd/bd/autoflush.go (shouldSkipExport)\n- cmd/bd/export.go (export with deduplication)\n- internal/storage/sqlite/metadata.go (export_hashes table)","status":"closed","priority":0,"issue_type":"bug","created_at":"2025-10-29T23:05:13.960352-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.19679-07:00","closed_at":"2025-10-29T22:22:20.406934-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-710a4916","content_hash":"3d8be03f83f87067b1aaf295b0b829d20890e47686e0da10ef81d2096f5ca974","title":"CRDT-based architecture for guaranteed convergence (v2.0)","description":"## Vision\nRedesign beads around Conflict-Free Replicated Data Types (CRDTs) to provide mathematical guarantees for N-way collision resolution at arbitrary scale.\n\n## Current Limitations\n- Content-hash based collision resolution fails at 5+ clones\n- Non-deterministic convergence in multi-round scenarios\n- UNIQUE constraint violations during rename operations\n- No formal proof of convergence properties\n\n## CRDT Benefits\n- Provably convergent (Strong Eventual Consistency)\n- Commutative/Associative/Idempotent operations\n- No coordination required between clones\n- Scales to 100+ concurrent workers\n- Well-understood mathematical foundations\n\n## Proposed Architecture\n\n### 1. UUID-Based IDs\nReplace sequential IDs with UUIDs:\n- Current: bd-1c63eb84, bd-9063acda, bd-4d80b7b1\n- CRDT: bd-a1b2c3d4-e5f6-7890-abcd-ef1234567890\n- Human aliases maintained separately: #42 maps to UUID\n\n### 2. Last-Write-Wins (LWW) Elements\nEach field becomes an LWW register:\n- title: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- status: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- Deterministic conflict resolution via Lamport timestamp + clone_id tiebreaker\n\n### 3. Operation Log\nTrack all operations as CRDT ops:\n- CREATE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id, fields)\n- UPDATE(uuid, field, timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- DELETE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id) - tombstone, not hard delete\n\n### 4. Sync as Merge\nSyncing becomes merging two CRDT states:\n- No merge conflicts possible\n- Deterministic merge function\n- Guaranteed convergence\n\n## Implementation Phases\n\n### Phase 1: Research \u0026 Design (4 weeks)\n- Study existing CRDT implementations (Automerge, Yjs, Loro)\n- Design schema for CRDT-based issue tracking\n- Prototype LWW-based Issue CRDT\n- Benchmark performance vs current system\n\n### Phase 2: Parallel Implementation (6 weeks)\n- Implement CRDT storage layer alongside SQLite\n- Build conversion tools: SQLite ↔ CRDT\n- Maintain backward compatibility with v1.x format\n- Migration path for existing databases\n\n### Phase 3: Testing \u0026 Validation (4 weeks)\n- Formal verification of convergence properties\n- Stress testing with 100+ clone scenario\n- Performance profiling and optimization\n- Documentation and examples\n\n### Phase 4: Migration \u0026 Rollout (4 weeks)\n- Release v2.0-beta with CRDT backend\n- Gradual migration from v1.x\n- Monitoring and bug fixes\n- Final v2.0 release\n\n## Risks \u0026 Mitigations\n\n**Risk 1: Performance overhead**\n- Mitigation: Benchmark early, optimize hot paths\n- CRDTs can be slower than append-only logs\n- May need compaction strategy\n\n**Risk 2: Storage bloat**\n- Mitigation: Implement operation log compaction\n- Tombstone garbage collection for deleted issues\n- Periodic snapshots to reduce log size\n\n**Risk 3: Breaking changes**\n- Mitigation: Maintain v1.x compatibility layer\n- Gradual migration tools\n- Dual-mode operation during transition\n\n**Risk 4: Complexity**\n- Mitigation: Use battle-tested CRDT libraries\n- Comprehensive documentation\n- Clear migration guide\n\n## Success Criteria\n- 100-clone collision test passes without failures\n- Formal proof of convergence properties\n- Performance within 2x of current system\n- Zero manual conflict resolution required\n- Backward compatible with v1.x databases\n\n## Timeline\n18-20 weeks total (4-5 months)\n\n## References\n- Automerge: https://automerge.org\n- Yjs: https://docs.yjs.dev\n- Loro: https://loro.dev\n- CRDT theory: Shapiro et al, A comprehensive study of CRDTs\n- Related issues: bd-e6d71828, bd-7a2b58fc,-1","status":"open","priority":3,"issue_type":"feature","created_at":"2025-10-29T10:23:57.978339-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.182513-07:00"}
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
{"id":"bd-9063acda","content_hash":"4ad564b5b844f5673cd8ec6355ad921cbf71e4fbd6d0a6aa5f4e9c4e3222408e","title":"Clean up linter errors (914 total issues)","description":"The codebase has 914 linter issues reported by golangci-lint. While many are documented as baseline in LINTING.md, we should clean these up systematically to improve code quality and maintainability.","design":"Break down by linter category, prioritizing high-impact issues:\n1. dupl (7) - Code duplication\n2. goconst (12) - Repeated strings\n3. gocyclo (11) - High complexity functions\n4. revive (78) - Style issues\n5. gosec (102) - Security warnings\n6. errcheck (683) - Unchecked errors (many in tests)","acceptance_criteria":"All linter categories reduced to acceptable levels, with remaining baseline documented in LINTING.md","notes":"Reduced from 56 to 41 issues locally, then to 0 issues.\n\n**Fixed in commits:**\n- c2c7eda: Fixed 15 actual errors (dupl, gosec, revive, staticcheck, unparam)\n- 963181d: Configured exclusions to get to 0 issues locally\n\n**Current status:**\n- ✅ Local: golangci-lint reports 0 issues\n- ❌ CI: Still failing (see [deleted:bd-cb64c226.1])\n\n**Problem:**\nConfig v2 format or golangci-lint-action@v8 compatibility issue causing CI to fail despite local success.\n\n**Next:** Debug [deleted:bd-cb64c226.1] to fix CI/local discrepancy","status":"in_progress","priority":2,"issue_type":"epic","created_at":"2025-10-24T01:01:12.997982-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.208031-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-942469b8","content_hash":"be178337752bf9a94ac06f13d6c36752c9104585b9aef43ade971ed50437a39e","title":"Rapid 5","description":"","status":"open","priority":3,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-29T19:11:57.508166-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.189947-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-96142dec","content_hash":"ba00d412efdb156e0449b304096f3e075df4c66606e6283b6501e8a29acb7b28","title":"Add fallback to polling on watcher failure","description":"Detect fsnotify.NewWatcher() errors and log warning. Auto-switch to polling mode with 5s ticker. Add BEADS_WATCHER_FALLBACK env var to control behavior.","status":"closed","priority":1,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-28T16:20:02.428439-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.220378-07:00","closed_at":"2025-10-28T19:23:43.595916-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-9826b69a","content_hash":"d7e67e9b28e525705562e3f81e9112f3882c20d726c6e0f57062153f0e6bf3b9","title":"CRDT-based architecture for guaranteed convergence (v2.0)","description":"## Vision\nRedesign beads around Conflict-Free Replicated Data Types (CRDTs) to provide mathematical guarantees for N-way collision resolution at arbitrary scale.\n\n## Current Limitations\n- Content-hash based collision resolution fails at 5+ clones\n- Non-deterministic convergence in multi-round scenarios\n- UNIQUE constraint violations during rename operations\n- No formal proof of convergence properties\n\n## CRDT Benefits\n- Provably convergent (Strong Eventual Consistency)\n- Commutative/Associative/Idempotent operations\n- No coordination required between clones\n- Scales to 100+ concurrent workers\n- Well-understood mathematical foundations\n\n## Proposed Architecture\n\n### 1. UUID-Based IDs\nReplace sequential IDs with UUIDs:\n- Current: bd-1c63eb84, bd-9063acda, bd-4d80b7b1\n- CRDT: bd-a1b2c3d4-e5f6-7890-abcd-ef1234567890\n- Human aliases maintained separately: #42 maps to UUID\n\n### 2. Last-Write-Wins (LWW) Elements\nEach field becomes an LWW register:\n- title: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- status: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- Deterministic conflict resolution via Lamport timestamp + clone_id tiebreaker\n\n### 3. Operation Log\nTrack all operations as CRDT ops:\n- CREATE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id, fields)\n- UPDATE(uuid, field, timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- DELETE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id) - tombstone, not hard delete\n\n### 4. Sync as Merge\nSyncing becomes merging two CRDT states:\n- No merge conflicts possible\n- Deterministic merge function\n- Guaranteed convergence\n\n## Implementation Phases\n\n### Phase 1: Research \u0026 Design (4 weeks)\n- Study existing CRDT implementations (Automerge, Yjs, Loro)\n- Design schema for CRDT-based issue tracking\n- Prototype LWW-based Issue CRDT\n- Benchmark performance vs current system\n\n### Phase 2: Parallel Implementation (6 weeks)\n- Implement CRDT storage layer alongside SQLite\n- Build conversion tools: SQLite ↔ CRDT\n- Maintain backward compatibility with v1.x format\n- Migration path for existing databases\n\n### Phase 3: Testing \u0026 Validation (4 weeks)\n- Formal verification of convergence properties\n- Stress testing with 100+ clone scenario\n- Performance profiling and optimization\n- Documentation and examples\n\n### Phase 4: Migration \u0026 Rollout (4 weeks)\n- Release v2.0-beta with CRDT backend\n- Gradual migration from v1.x\n- Monitoring and bug fixes\n- Final v2.0 release\n\n## Risks \u0026 Mitigations\n\n**Risk 1: Performance overhead**\n- Mitigation: Benchmark early, optimize hot paths\n- CRDTs can be slower than append-only logs\n- May need compaction strategy\n\n**Risk 2: Storage bloat**\n- Mitigation: Implement operation log compaction\n- Tombstone garbage collection for deleted issues\n- Periodic snapshots to reduce log size\n\n**Risk 3: Breaking changes**\n- Mitigation: Maintain v1.x compatibility layer\n- Gradual migration tools\n- Dual-mode operation during transition\n\n**Risk 4: Complexity**\n- Mitigation: Use battle-tested CRDT libraries\n- Comprehensive documentation\n- Clear migration guide\n\n## Success Criteria\n- 100-clone collision test passes without failures\n- Formal proof of convergence properties\n- Performance within 2x of current system\n- Zero manual conflict resolution required\n- Backward compatible with v1.x databases\n\n## Timeline\n18-20 weeks total (4-5 months)\n\n## References\n- Automerge: https://automerge.org\n- Yjs: https://docs.yjs.dev\n- Loro: https://loro.dev\n- CRDT theory: Shapiro et al, A comprehensive study of CRDTs\n- Related issues: bd-0dcea000, bd-4d7fca8a, bd-6221bdcd","status":"open","priority":3,"issue_type":"feature","created_at":"2025-10-29T20:48:00.267736-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.195647-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-9826b69a","content_hash":"d7e67e9b28e525705562e3f81e9112f3882c20d726c6e0f57062153f0e6bf3b9","title":"CRDT-based architecture for guaranteed convergence (v2.0)","description":"## Vision\nRedesign beads around Conflict-Free Replicated Data Types (CRDTs) to provide mathematical guarantees for N-way collision resolution at arbitrary scale.\n\n## Current Limitations\n- Content-hash based collision resolution fails at 5+ clones\n- Non-deterministic convergence in multi-round scenarios\n- UNIQUE constraint violations during rename operations\n- No formal proof of convergence properties\n\n## CRDT Benefits\n- Provably convergent (Strong Eventual Consistency)\n- Commutative/Associative/Idempotent operations\n- No coordination required between clones\n- Scales to 100+ concurrent workers\n- Well-understood mathematical foundations\n\n## Proposed Architecture\n\n### 1. UUID-Based IDs\nReplace sequential IDs with UUIDs:\n- Current: bd-1c63eb84, bd-9063acda, bd-4d80b7b1\n- CRDT: bd-a1b2c3d4-e5f6-7890-abcd-ef1234567890\n- Human aliases maintained separately: #42 maps to UUID\n\n### 2. Last-Write-Wins (LWW) Elements\nEach field becomes an LWW register:\n- title: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- status: (timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- Deterministic conflict resolution via Lamport timestamp + clone_id tiebreaker\n\n### 3. Operation Log\nTrack all operations as CRDT ops:\n- CREATE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id, fields)\n- UPDATE(uuid, field, timestamp, clone_id, value)\n- DELETE(uuid, timestamp, clone_id) - tombstone, not hard delete\n\n### 4. Sync as Merge\nSyncing becomes merging two CRDT states:\n- No merge conflicts possible\n- Deterministic merge function\n- Guaranteed convergence\n\n## Implementation Phases\n\n### Phase 1: Research \u0026 Design (4 weeks)\n- Study existing CRDT implementations (Automerge, Yjs, Loro)\n- Design schema for CRDT-based issue tracking\n- Prototype LWW-based Issue CRDT\n- Benchmark performance vs current system\n\n### Phase 2: Parallel Implementation (6 weeks)\n- Implement CRDT storage layer alongside SQLite\n- Build conversion tools: SQLite ↔ CRDT\n- Maintain backward compatibility with v1.x format\n- Migration path for existing databases\n\n### Phase 3: Testing \u0026 Validation (4 weeks)\n- Formal verification of convergence properties\n- Stress testing with 100+ clone scenario\n- Performance profiling and optimization\n- Documentation and examples\n\n### Phase 4: Migration \u0026 Rollout (4 weeks)\n- Release v2.0-beta with CRDT backend\n- Gradual migration from v1.x\n- Monitoring and bug fixes\n- Final v2.0 release\n\n## Risks \u0026 Mitigations\n\n**Risk 1: Performance overhead**\n- Mitigation: Benchmark early, optimize hot paths\n- CRDTs can be slower than append-only logs\n- May need compaction strategy\n\n**Risk 2: Storage bloat**\n- Mitigation: Implement operation log compaction\n- Tombstone garbage collection for deleted issues\n- Periodic snapshots to reduce log size\n\n**Risk 3: Breaking changes**\n- Mitigation: Maintain v1.x compatibility layer\n- Gradual migration tools\n- Dual-mode operation during transition\n\n**Risk 4: Complexity**\n- Mitigation: Use battle-tested CRDT libraries\n- Comprehensive documentation\n- Clear migration guide\n\n## Success Criteria\n- 100-clone collision test passes without failures\n- Formal proof of convergence properties\n- Performance within 2x of current system\n- Zero manual conflict resolution required\n- Backward compatible with v1.x databases\n\n## Timeline\n18-20 weeks total (4-5 months)\n\n## References\n- Automerge: https://automerge.org\n- Yjs: https://docs.yjs.dev\n- Loro: https://loro.dev\n- CRDT theory: Shapiro et al, A comprehensive study of CRDTs\n- Related issues: bd-0dcea000, bd-4d7fca8a, bd-6221bdcd","status":"closed","priority":3,"issue_type":"feature","created_at":"2025-10-29T20:48:00.267736-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-31T20:06:44.60536-07:00","closed_at":"2025-10-31T20:06:44.60536-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-98c4e1fa.1","content_hash":"6440d1ece0a91c8f49adc09aafa7a998b049bcd51f257125ad8bc0b7b03e317b","title":"Update AGENTS.md with event-driven mode","description":"Document BEADS_DAEMON_MODE env var. Explain opt-in during Phase 1. Add troubleshooting for watcher failures.","status":"open","priority":2,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-29T23:05:13.986452-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.197569-07:00","dependencies":[{"issue_id":"bd-98c4e1fa.1","depends_on_id":"bd-0e1f2b1b","type":"parent-child","created_at":"2025-10-31T19:38:09.131439-07:00","created_by":"stevey"}]}
{"id":"bd-9ae788be","content_hash":"19599f6bcc268e97438593e08eb6343b551ce765f0d91956591aa811cbb90690","title":"Implement clone-scoped ID allocation to prevent N-way collisions","description":"## Problem\nCurrent ID allocation uses per-clone atomic counters (issue_counters table) that sync based on local database state. In N-way collision scenarios:\n- Clone B sees {test-1} locally, allocates test-2\n- Clone D sees {test-1, test-2, test-3} locally, allocates test-4\n- When same content gets assigned test-2 and test-4, convergence fails\n\nRoot cause: Each clone independently allocates IDs without global coordination, leading to overlapping assignments for the same content.\n\n## Solution\nAdd clone UUID to ID allocation to make every ID globally unique:\n\n**Current format:** `test-1`, `test-2`, `test-3`\n**New format:** `test-1-a7b3`, `test-2-a7b3`, `test-3-c4d9`\n\nWhere suffix is first 4 chars of clone UUID.\n\n## Implementation\n\n### 1. Add clone_identity table\n```sql\nCREATE TABLE clone_identity (\n clone_uuid TEXT PRIMARY KEY,\n created_at DATETIME DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP\n);\n```\n\n### 2. Modify getNextIDForPrefix()\n```go\nfunc (s *SQLiteStorage) getNextIDForPrefix(ctx context.Context, prefix string) (string, error) {\n cloneUUID := s.getOrCreateCloneUUID(ctx)\n shortUUID := cloneUUID[:4]\n \n nextNum := s.getNextCounterForPrefix(ctx, prefix)\n return fmt.Sprintf(\"%s-%d-%s\", prefix, nextNum, shortUUID), nil\n}\n```\n\n### 3. Update ID parsing logic\nAll places that parse IDs (utils.ExtractIssueNumber, etc.) need to handle new format.\n\n### 4. Migration strategy\n- Existing IDs remain unchanged (no suffix)\n- New IDs get clone suffix automatically\n- Display layer can hide suffix in UI: `bd-cb64c226.3-a7b3` → `#42`\n\n## Benefits\n- **Zero collision risk**: Same content in different clones gets different IDs\n- **Maintains readability**: Still sequential numbering within clone\n- **No coordination needed**: Works offline, no central authority\n- **Scales to 100+ clones**: 4-char hex = 65,536 unique clones\n\n## Concerns\n- ID format change may break existing integrations\n- Need migration path for existing databases\n- Display logic needs update to hide/show suffixes appropriately\n\n## Success Criteria\n- 10+ clone collision test passes without failures\n- Existing issues continue to work (backward compatibility)\n- Documentation updated with new ID format\n- Migration guide for v1.x → v2.x\n\n## Timeline\nMedium-term (v1.1-v1.2), 2-3 weeks implementation\n\n## References\n- Related to bd-e6d71828 (immediate fix)\n- See beads_nway_test.go for failing N-way tests","status":"open","priority":2,"issue_type":"feature","created_at":"2025-10-29T10:22:52.260524-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.18193-07:00"}
{"id":"bd-9f1fce5d","content_hash":"14b0d330680e979e504043d2c560bd2eda204698f5622c3bdc6f91816f861d22","title":"Add internal/ai package for LLM integration","description":"Shared AI client for repair commands.\n\nProviders:\n- Anthropic (Claude)\n- OpenAI (GPT)\n- Ollama (local)\n\nEnv vars:\n- BEADS_AI_PROVIDER\n- BEADS_AI_API_KEY\n- BEADS_AI_MODEL\n\nFiles: internal/ai/client.go (new)","status":"open","priority":1,"issue_type":"task","created_at":"2025-10-28T14:48:29.072473-07:00","updated_at":"2025-10-30T17:12:58.219706-07:00"}