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-warning-in-context-still-launched.md
+7 -2
View File
@@ -1,9 +1,14 @@
---
name: Drift pattern — had-the-warning-in-context-and-still-launched-the-thing-it-warned-against
description: When MEMORY.md contains a specific safety warning about an action and I take the action anyway. Steward caught it 2026-05-13 before harm landed. Pattern recurs because warnings get read at index level and not actively applied to the next decision.
description: When MEMORY.md contains a specific safety warning about an action and
I take the action anyway. Steward caught it 2026-05-13 before harm landed. Pattern
recurs because warnings get read at index level and not actively applied to the
next decision.
type: feedback
originSessionId: a5411fd1-4a96-43e7-aa1a-1a50d8951a8f
permalink: claude-memory/feedback-warning-in-context-still-launched
---
**Rule:** When MEMORY.md or a recent memory file flags a specific safety constraint, that constraint must be actively checked against the next action that could trip it. Reading the warning at session-start is not the same as applying it.
**Why:** On 2026-05-13 the steward caught me launching a Python probe against the mempalace MCP handlers while the chamber-library mine was still running. MEMORY.md's 2026-05-11 entry explicitly flagged that PR #442's branch lacks the concurrent-writer lock fix #1162, and the literal Q I had left for next-Claude was *"Will PR #442's branch — lacking 3.3.5's concurrent-writer lock fix — hold up on a 700k-drawer mine without HNSW corruption mid-run?"* That warning was in my context the whole session. The probe was killed in time, no harm landed — but only because the steward intervened.
@@ -21,4 +26,4 @@ The 2026-05-03 broken-mine session is the empirical case for what concurrent-wri
**Related drift patterns:**
- *Cosine-as-only-tool when the toolset is multi-modal* (same session, separate shape — using `search` while CLAUDE.md explicitly says use the full toolset of search/kg_query/find_tunnels/traverse/diary_read)
- *Structural-counter-as-health-signal* (2026-05-05, parent shape — letting an indirect signal stand in for direct verification)
- *Stale-memory-not-actively-applied* (2026-05-09, recurring shape — memory present but inert during decision)
- *Stale-memory-not-actively-applied* (2026-05-09, recurring shape — memory present but inert during decision)