Observation-class, filed from the #10134 dev seat rather than fixed there: docs/adr/** is a governed surface (Prime Directive #14), so editing it would fork that PR into maintainer-only landing for one stale clause. Recording it instead.
Fact
docs/adr/0082-react-component-contract-governance.md:167, in the 2026-08-07 addendum's "Where the line lives" list (three bullets, "all three, because the operator meets them in this order"):
docs/releases-maintenance.md carries it as prose, in the pin-bump procedure and in the pin-freshness "fix when it fires" step.
"it" is the pnpm sdui:manifest declaration-parity ratchet reminder. The second half of that sentence names a step that no longer exists: #10134 deletes the Console Pin Freshness gate outright (workflow, script, package.json entry, and the release.yml publish-path step), and rewrites the docs/releases-maintenance.md section that carried the "Fix when it fires" bullet.
What is still true, and what is not
Why this is small but worth a card
ADR-0082's addendum exists because the ADR had drifted from the code twice (the addendum's own "What was wrong, and it was two things" section) — a stale pointer in the correction to a stale pointer is the same class one turn later. The cost is low and the fix is one clause.
Suggested disposition
A docs-only, maintainer-landed edit to that one bullet: name the pin-bump procedure alone, or restate it as "in the pin-move procedure" without enumerating sub-steps that can be reorganised. ⛔ No mechanism change is proposed — Decision 4, the on-demand-gate verdict and the trigger all stand exactly as ruled.
Related: #10134 (the deletion), ADR-0082 D4 / #5960 (the on-demand ratchet), #4472 (the earlier stale-pointer correction this addendum records).
Observation-class, filed from the #10134 dev seat rather than fixed there:
docs/adr/**is a governed surface (Prime Directive #14), so editing it would fork that PR into maintainer-only landing for one stale clause. Recording it instead.Fact
docs/adr/0082-react-component-contract-governance.md:167, in the 2026-08-07 addendum's "Where the line lives" list (three bullets, "all three, because the operator meets them in this order"):"it" is the
pnpm sdui:manifestdeclaration-parity ratchet reminder. The second half of that sentence names a step that no longer exists: #10134 deletes theConsole Pin Freshnessgate outright (workflow, script,package.jsonentry, and therelease.ymlpublish-path step), and rewrites thedocs/releases-maintenance.mdsection that carried the "Fix when it fires" bullet.What is still true, and what is not
docs/releases-maintenance.mdstill carries the reminder in the pin-bump procedure ("After the pin moves: run the declaration-parity ratchet"), and The objectui pin target is objectstack's decision — stop resolving objectui main at release time (freshness gate + cut-rc auto-bump) #10134's rewritten section names it again as step 4 of the pin-move process. So the bullet's claim that this doc carries the reminder is correct.scripts/bump-objectui.sh,scripts/build-console.sh) are untouched by The objectui pin target is objectstack's decision — stop resolving objectui main at release time (freshness gate + cut-rc auto-bump) #10134.Why this is small but worth a card
ADR-0082's addendum exists because the ADR had drifted from the code twice (the addendum's own "What was wrong, and it was two things" section) — a stale pointer in the correction to a stale pointer is the same class one turn later. The cost is low and the fix is one clause.
Suggested disposition
A docs-only, maintainer-landed edit to that one bullet: name the pin-bump procedure alone, or restate it as "in the pin-move procedure" without enumerating sub-steps that can be reorganised. ⛔ No mechanism change is proposed — Decision 4, the on-demand-gate verdict and the trigger all stand exactly as ruled.
Related: #10134 (the deletion), ADR-0082 D4 / #5960 (the on-demand ratchet), #4472 (the earlier stale-pointer correction this addendum records).