ahmido/TenantAtlas
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects 1 Releases Wiki Activity
ce0615a9c1
TenantAtlas/specs/182-platform-relocation/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido ce0615a9c1 Spec 182: relocate Laravel platform to apps/platform (#213) 
## Summary
- move the Laravel application into `apps/platform` and keep the repository root for orchestration, docs, and tooling
- update the local command model, Sail/Docker wiring, runtime paths, and ignore rules around the new platform location
- add relocation quickstart/contracts plus focused smoke coverage for bootstrap, command model, routes, and runtime behavior

## Validation
- `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Feature/PlatformRelocation`
- integrated browser smoke validated `/up`, `/`, `/admin`, `/admin/choose-workspace`, and tenant route semantics for `200`, `403`, and `404`

## Remaining Rollout Checks
- validate Dokploy build context and working-directory assumptions against the new `apps/platform` layout
- confirm web, queue, and scheduler processes all start from the expected working directory in staging/production
- verify no legacy volume mounts or asset-publish paths still point at the old root-level `public/` or `storage/` locations

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #213
2026-04-08 08:40:47 +00:00

1.3 KiB
Raw Blame History

Specification Quality Checklist: Platform Relocation to apps/platform

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-04-07
Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

  • No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
  • Focused on user value and business needs
  • Written for non-technical stakeholders
  • All mandatory sections completed

Requirement Completeness

  • No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
  • Requirements are testable and unambiguous
  • Success criteria are measurable
  • Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
  • All acceptance scenarios are defined
  • Edge cases are identified
  • Scope is clearly bounded
  • Dependencies and assumptions identified

Feature Readiness

  • All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
  • User scenarios cover primary flows
  • Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
  • No implementation details leak into specification

Notes

  • This is an infrastructure topology spec, so repo artifacts and runtime surfaces are named only where they define scope or validation boundaries.
  • No clarification markers remain; the spec is ready for planning.