First deployment
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Comprehensive review findings are tracked and remediated
|
||||
The system SHALL track review findings and remediation outcomes in a structured workflow.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Review finding lifecycle
|
||||
- **WHEN** a code review identifies defect, risk, or optimization opportunity
|
||||
- **THEN** finding is recorded with severity/owner/status
|
||||
- **AND** remediation is linked to a verifiable change
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Optimization work is bounded and measurable
|
||||
Optimization actions SHALL include measurable before/after evidence.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Optimization evidence recorded
|
||||
- **WHEN** performance or code quality optimization is implemented
|
||||
- **THEN** benchmark or metric delta is documented
|
||||
- **AND** no functional regression is introduced
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
|
||||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: HTTP delivery applies compression and cache policy
|
||||
The system SHALL apply transport-level compression and explicit cache directives for static assets, API responses, and public HTML routes.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Compressed responses are available for eligible payloads
|
||||
- **WHEN** a client requests compressible content that exceeds the compression threshold
|
||||
- **THEN** the response is served with gzip compression
|
||||
- **AND** response headers advertise the selected content encoding
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Route classes receive deterministic cache-control directives
|
||||
- **WHEN** clients request static assets, API responses, or HTML page routes
|
||||
- **THEN** each route class returns a cache policy aligned to its freshness requirements
|
||||
- **AND** cache directives are explicit and testable from response headers
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Media rendering optimizes perceived loading performance
|
||||
The system SHALL lazy-load non-critical images and render shimmer placeholders until image load completion or fallback resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Feed and modal images lazy-load with placeholders
|
||||
- **WHEN** feed or modal images have not completed loading
|
||||
- **THEN** a shimmer placeholder is visible for the pending image region
|
||||
- **AND** the placeholder is removed after load or fallback error handling completes
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Image rendering reduces layout shift risk
|
||||
- **WHEN** article images are rendered in hero, feed, or modal contexts
|
||||
- **THEN** image elements include explicit dimensions and async decoding hints
|
||||
- **AND** layout remains stable while content loads
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Smooth scrolling behavior is consistently enabled
|
||||
The system SHALL provide smooth scrolling behavior for in-page navigation and user-initiated scroll interactions.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: In-page navigation uses smooth scrolling
|
||||
- **WHEN** users navigate to in-page anchors or equivalent interactions
|
||||
- **THEN** scrolling transitions occur smoothly rather than jumping abruptly
|
||||
- **AND** behavior is consistent across supported breakpoints
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Performance thresholds are continuously validated
|
||||
The system SHALL enforce page-speed and rendering performance thresholds in automated checks.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Performance budget gate
|
||||
- **WHEN** performance checks exceed configured budget thresholds
|
||||
- **THEN** CI performance gate fails
|
||||
- **AND** reports identify the regressed metrics and impacted pages
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: End-to-end coverage spans UI, API, and DB effects
|
||||
The system SHALL provide end-to-end tests that validate full workflows across UI, API, and persisted database outcomes.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Core user flow E2E
|
||||
- **WHEN** a core browsing flow is executed in E2E tests
|
||||
- **THEN** UI behavior, API responses, and DB side effects match expected outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Edge-case workflows are covered
|
||||
The system SHALL include edge-case E2E tests for critical failure and boundary conditions.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Failure-state E2E
|
||||
- **WHEN** an edge case is triggered (empty data, unavailable upstream, invalid permalink, etc.)
|
||||
- **THEN** system response remains stable and user-safe
|
||||
- **AND** no unhandled runtime errors occur
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Production monitoring covers key reliability signals
|
||||
The system SHALL capture and expose reliability/performance metrics for core services.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Metrics available for operations
|
||||
- **WHEN** production system is running
|
||||
- **THEN** dashboards expose API latency/error rate, scheduler freshness, and ingestion health signals
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Alerting is actionable and threshold-based
|
||||
The system SHALL send alerts on defined thresholds with clear operator guidance.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Threshold breach alert
|
||||
- **WHEN** a monitored metric breaches configured threshold
|
||||
- **THEN** alert is emitted to configured channel
|
||||
- **AND** alert includes service, metric, threshold, and suggested next action
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Release quality gates are mandatory
|
||||
The system SHALL enforce mandatory CI quality gates before release.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Gate failure blocks release
|
||||
- **WHEN** any required gate fails
|
||||
- **THEN** release pipeline status is failed
|
||||
- **AND** deployment/archive promotion is blocked
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Required gates are explicit and versioned
|
||||
The system SHALL define an explicit set of required gates and versions for tooling.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Gate manifest exists
|
||||
- **WHEN** pipeline configuration is evaluated
|
||||
- **THEN** required gates include tests, accessibility, security, and performance checks
|
||||
- **AND** tool versions are pinned or documented for reproducibility
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
|
||||
## ADDED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Security test harness runs in CI
|
||||
The system SHALL run baseline automated security checks in CI.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Security checks execute
|
||||
- **WHEN** CI pipeline runs on protected branches
|
||||
- **THEN** dependency vulnerability and static security checks execute
|
||||
- **AND** high-severity findings fail the gate
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Performance test harness enforces thresholds
|
||||
The system SHALL run page-speed and API-performance checks against defined thresholds.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Performance regression detection
|
||||
- **WHEN** measured performance exceeds regression threshold
|
||||
- **THEN** performance gate fails
|
||||
- **AND** reports include metric deltas and failing surfaces
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
|
||||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Confirmation guard for destructive commands
|
||||
Destructive admin commands SHALL require explicit confirmation before execution.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Missing confirmation flag
|
||||
- **WHEN** an operator runs clear-news or clean-archive without required confirmation
|
||||
- **THEN** the command exits without applying destructive changes
|
||||
- **AND** prints guidance for explicit confirmation usage
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Dry-run support where applicable
|
||||
Maintenance commands SHALL provide dry-run mode for previewing effects where feasible.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Dry-run preview
|
||||
- **WHEN** an operator invokes a command with dry-run mode
|
||||
- **THEN** the command reports intended actions and affected counts
|
||||
- **AND** persists no data changes
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Actionable failure summaries
|
||||
Admin commands SHALL output actionable errors and final status summaries.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Partial failure reporting
|
||||
- **WHEN** a maintenance command partially fails
|
||||
- **THEN** output includes succeeded/failed counts
|
||||
- **AND** includes actionable next-step guidance
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Admin workflows have automated verification coverage
|
||||
Admin safety-critical workflows SHALL be covered by automated tests.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Safety command regression test
|
||||
- **WHEN** admin command tests run in CI
|
||||
- **THEN** confirmation and dry-run behavior are validated by tests
|
||||
- **AND** regressions in safety guards fail the gate
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
|
||||
## MODIFIED Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirement: Core user flows comply with WCAG 2.2 AA baseline
|
||||
The system SHALL meet WCAG 2.2 AA accessibility requirements for primary interactions and content presentation, and SHALL verify compliance through automated accessibility checks in CI.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Keyboard-only interaction flow
|
||||
- **WHEN** a keyboard-only user navigates the page
|
||||
- **THEN** all primary interactive elements are reachable and operable
|
||||
- **AND** visible focus indication is present at each step
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Contrast and non-text alternatives
|
||||
- **WHEN** users consume text and non-text UI content
|
||||
- **THEN** color contrast meets AA thresholds for relevant text and controls
|
||||
- **AND** meaningful images and controls include accessible labels/alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
#### Scenario: Accessibility CI gate
|
||||
- **WHEN** pull request validation runs
|
||||
- **THEN** automated accessibility checks execute against key pages and flows
|
||||
- **AND** violations above configured severity fail the gate
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user