Dispatcher Build Gate Summary (local)

• rubocop (diff-only): N/A (no Ruby files changed)
• brakeman: skipped (per repo build gate config; disabled)
• tests: N/A (notes-only change)

Labeled .

(FYI: my previous comment dropped the literal label name due to shell parsing. Confirming PR is labeled gate:build-passed.)

Simplicity Review

Verdict: PASS_WITH_NOTES (LOW)

The doc is already fairly minimal for a 117-repo inventory and proposes a pragmatic tracking loop (canonical index → per-plugin umbrella issue → single central tracking issue, with Projects optional).

Notes / Suggestions

• Define an explicit minimal umbrella-issue template to keep tracking uniform and reduce per-plugin decision-making (e.g., Target Ruby/Rails, CI green, release + changelog, upgrade notes).
• Reduce maintenance burden of the 117-row markdown table: consider CSV/JSON source with generated markdown, or trim fields to the minimum and move subjective Risk/Complexity into per-plugin umbrella issues. Also add a snapshot date + update cadence line.
• Label strategy: make only one label required (e.g., modernization); keep optional labels only if there’s a concrete workflow.
• Scope clarity: explicitly note Risk/Complexity are initial guesses for prioritization (or omit them from the inventory table).

Architecture Review

Verdict: PASS_WITH_NOTES (LOW)

Summary: Docs-only inventory + tracking approach is directionally sound and maintainable, but will drift without lightweight automation and clearer governance.

Notes:

• Define explicit ownership + update cadence for the canonical index (notes/WA-NEW-014.md).
• Prefer a repeatable/automated way to collect default branch + last-updated metadata (script or GitHub Action) to prevent inconsistencies.
• Standardize the per-plugin umbrella issue approach via an issue template and ensure labels exist consistently across repos.
• Use stable naming/ID conventions and consider linking umbrella issue URLs back into the index for easy auditing.
• If adopting an org-level Project, document minimal viable rules to avoid another sync burden.

Security Review

Verdict: PASS_WITH_NOTES (LOW)

Summary: Docs-only change; no secrets/customer data/executable code. Minor info-disclosure considerations from aggregating repo metadata and tagging some plugins as “High risk” (esp. payments/tax).

Notes / recommendations:

• Consider softening phrasing: rename “Risk” to “Modernization priority” / “Operational risk” and add a note that these are triage heuristics, not security assessments.
• Add a one-liner confirming the inventory is limited to public GitHub repos and contains no sensitive operational details; optionally document how the list was generated/validated.

✅ Wave 1 Reviews Complete

All Wave 1 reviewers returned PASS_WITH_NOTES (LOW). Marking this PR merge-ready.

• Architecture: ✅ PASS_WITH_NOTES (LOW)
• Security: ✅ PASS_WITH_NOTES (LOW)
• Simplicity: ✅ (already complete)

Labeled merge:ready.

Suggested follow-ups (non-blocking):

• Add ownership/update cadence + generation notes to notes/WA-NEW-014.md
• Consider softening “Risk” wording to avoid implying security assessment

✅ Review complete (docs-only change)

This PR adds a single documentation note (notes/WA-NEW-014.md) and does not change runtime code.

• Build gate: PASS (N/A for rubocop/tests)
• Wave 1: architecture/security/simplicity reviews complete ✅

Labeling merge:ready and marking the issue status:done.

Client impact: None expected.

Auto-merge hold started (60 min). Apply merge:veto to cancel.