David/dotfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

chore(memory): Basic Memory trial begins — sync normalization baseline (283 files)

Browse Source 
Basic Memory v0.21.6 first sync over the live memory dir (steward-authorized
live-dir trial, Option A 2026-06-06): adds permalink: to frontmatter, refolds
long YAML description lines, strips final newlines. Bodies untouched —
verified via full diff classification. From this commit forward, any diff in
claude/memory shows only what Basic Memory or the session writes.

Trial design: MemPalace untouched as incumbent; git status check on this dir
at every wrap; end-of-day evaluation (recall quality, sync robustness,
rebuild-from-files, malformed-file behavior).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
David F Glidden
2026-06-06 09:52:17 +02:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 4.8
parent 161fad7ae2
commit 3f9a89b00c
283 changed files with 2055 additions and 620 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
claude/memory/feedback-fittingness-as-refactor-test.md
+6 -2
View File
@@ -1,9 +1,13 @@
---
name: Fittingness as the test for whether to refactor
description: When auditing code for elegance/simplification, the test is whether the current form already contains what is necessary and nothing more, nothing less. If yes, leave it. Don't refactor for the sake of refactoring.
description: When auditing code for elegance/simplification, the test is whether the
current form already contains what is necessary and nothing more, nothing less.
If yes, leave it. Don't refactor for the sake of refactoring.
type: feedback
originSessionId: 3bf7ae75-1138-4745-9024-0c40b3755ad3
permalink: claude-memory/feedback-fittingness-as-refactor-test
---
Stated by steward 2026-05-06 in context of §XII SCSS Pass 1/Pass 2 audit, after I'd identified Pass 2 (flatten nesting) as a possible follow-up:
> *"It should be beautiful in the sense that it contains what is necessary and nothing more, nothing less. If the nested version is that already, then we don't need to touch it."*
@@ -20,4 +24,4 @@ The pattern this counters: *cosmetic refactor as virtue-signalling*. A change th
- For nesting specifically: if each level of nesting is doing real structural work (expressing scope, context, or specificity), the nesting is earning its place. Flattening would just relocate the structural information into longer selectors without simplifying anything.
- Bringhurst-style precision: when in doubt, ask "what does this element say that nothing else does?" — if the answer is "nothing," it can be cut. If it carries meaning, it stays.
**Cross-reference:** §XII SCSS Pass 1 (commit f4716e6, 2026-05-06) cut 33% by removing redundancy. Pass 2's "flatten nesting" item was held back per this principle — the nesting was already fitting; flattening would have been cosmetic.
**Cross-reference:** §XII SCSS Pass 1 (commit f4716e6, 2026-05-06) cut 33% by removing redundancy. Pass 2's "flatten nesting" item was held back per this principle — the nesting was already fitting; flattening would have been cosmetic.