ahmido
ce0615a9c1
## 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
35 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
35 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
# 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](../spec.md)
|
|
|
|
## Content Quality
|
|
|
|
- [x] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
|
|
- [x] Focused on user value and business needs
|
|
- [x] Written for non-technical stakeholders
|
|
- [x] All mandatory sections completed
|
|
|
|
## Requirement Completeness
|
|
|
|
- [x] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
|
|
- [x] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
|
|
- [x] Success criteria are measurable
|
|
- [x] Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
|
|
- [x] All acceptance scenarios are defined
|
|
- [x] Edge cases are identified
|
|
- [x] Scope is clearly bounded
|
|
- [x] Dependencies and assumptions identified
|
|
|
|
## Feature Readiness
|
|
|
|
- [x] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
|
|
- [x] User scenarios cover primary flows
|
|
- [x] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
|
|
- [x] 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. |