docs(rfc): accept M1 specification set

[HsiangNianian]

What changed

• accept RFC-0001, RFC-0003, RFC-0004, and RFC-0005 after the recorded human decision
• retain RFC-0002 as the already accepted execution contract
• keep RFC-0006 in Draft under M6 probability analysis
• correct the roadmap boundary between the M1 specification freeze and M6 analysis
• add a repository contract test that locks the accepted M1 RFC set

Acceptance evidence

• RFC-0001 checked Pest grammar and normative cases pass
• RFC-0003 Draft 2020-12 schema, examples, graph invariants, and drift-negative cases pass
• RFC-0004 target stub, API manifest, batch vectors, package boundary, and strict mypy pass
• RFC-0005 conformance schema/examples and M0-M6 release contract pass
• every mapped implementation issue references its frozen RFC boundary
• implementation completion remains downstream work and is not claimed by RFC acceptance

Validation

• cargo test --all-targets --all-features — 25 passed
• release arithmetic/randomness/property suites — 2/8/5 passed
• cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features -- -D warnings -A non-local-definitions
• uv run --no-sync python -m unittest discover -s tests -v — 88 passed
• Ruff, strict mypy, and strict Sphinx HTML passed

Closes #2.
Closes #4.
Closes #5.
Closes #7.

Summary by Sourcery

Finalize the M1 RFC specification set and lock its status in documentation and tests.

Enhancements:

• Update RFC documents to mark the agreed M1 specifications as accepted while keeping the M6 probability analysis RFC in draft.
• Adjust the roadmap to clarify the boundary between the M1 specification freeze and later M6 analysis.

Documentation:

• Revise RFC texts and the roadmap to reflect acceptance of the M1 RFC set and the continued draft status of the M6 analysis RFC.

Tests:

• Add a documentation contract test that verifies the accepted M1 RFC set, the draft status of the M6 RFC, and the roadmap wording around M1 and M6 milestones.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide

Lock in the accepted M1 RFC set via documentation updates and a repository contract test that verifies RFC statuses and the roadmap boundary between the M1 specification freeze and later M6 probability analysis.

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Add a repository contract test that enforces the accepted M1 RFC set and the separation of M1 from M6 probability analysis.	Introduce RFC_DIRECTORY and ROADMAP path constants for documentation contract tests. Add a test that asserts RFC-0001 through RFC-0005 are marked Accepted and RFC-0006 is marked Draft in their documents. Add roadmap parsing and assertions to confirm verification/release RFCs are included in M1 and probability analysis remains part of M6.	tests/test_documentation_contract.py
Update RFC documents to reflect acceptance for the M1 specification set.	Adjust status metadata in RFC-0001 to mark it as Accepted as part of the M1 specification set. Adjust status metadata in RFC-0003 to mark it as Accepted as part of the M1 specification set. Adjust status metadata in RFC-0004 to mark it as Accepted as part of the M1 specification set. Adjust status metadata in RFC-0005 to mark it as Accepted as part of the M1 specification set.	docs/rfcs/0001-dice-program-language-v2.rst docs/rfcs/0003-typed-results-traces-errors.rst docs/rfcs/0004-python-engine-api-package-boundary.rst docs/rfcs/0005-verification-documentation-release.rst
Clarify roadmap documentation for the M1 specification freeze and M6 probability analysis.	Refine the M1 roadmap section to explicitly mention verification/release RFCs as part of the M1 specification freeze. Clarify that probability analysis remains a separate concern assigned to the M6 milestone. Ensure wording matches expectations asserted by the new documentation contract test.	docs/source/roadmap.rst

Assessment against linked issues

Issue	Objective	Addressed	Explanation
#2	Mark RFC-0005 as an accepted specification (post-human review) and update its documentation status accordingly.	✅
#2	Introduce repository-level tests and documentation wiring that lock in the accepted M1 RFC set, including RFC-0005, while keeping RFC-0006 in Draft and clarifying roadmap boundaries between M1 verification/release work and M6 probability analysis.	✅
#4	Mark RFC-0003 (typed results, traces, and errors) as Accepted in the documentation to record human review accepting the public schema 2.0 boundary.	✅
#4	Add or update repository-level contract tests and related docs to lock in RFC-0003 as part of the accepted M1 specification set, distinct from the still-draft M6 analysis work.	✅
#5	Mark RFC-0004 (Python Engine API and package boundary) as Accepted in project documentation and lock this status via repository tests as part of the M1 specification set.	✅
#7	Finalize RFC-0001 (OneRoll Program Language v2) by marking its status as Accepted and incorporating any final review edits so that the language boundary is considered human-accepted.	✅
#7	Add and enforce a repository-level contract that locks RFC-0001 into the accepted M1 specification set (distinct from the M6 probability analysis), ensuring its status and roadmap placement are machine-checked.	✅

Possibly linked issues

• #RFC-0005: The PR performs the human acceptance of RFC-0005 and adds tests enforcing its conformance and release contract.
• #RFC-0001: The PR marks RFC-0001 as Accepted, confirms its grammar/tests, and adds a contract test enforcing this status.

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[sourcery-ai]

Hey - I've left some high level feedback:

• The roadmap parsing in test_m1_rfc_set_is_accepted_without_absorbing_m6_analysis is quite brittle, relying on exact section titles and phrasing; consider using more robust markers or regexes so minor wording changes in the roadmap don’t break the contract test.
• The RFC status assertions are tied to hardcoded file names and numbers; if the RFC directory structure evolves, this could become fragile, so you might want to centralize RFC metadata (e.g., in a manifest) and drive the test from that instead.

Prompt for AI Agents

Please address the comments from this code review:

## Overall Comments
- The roadmap parsing in `test_m1_rfc_set_is_accepted_without_absorbing_m6_analysis` is quite brittle, relying on exact section titles and phrasing; consider using more robust markers or regexes so minor wording changes in the roadmap don’t break the contract test.
- The RFC status assertions are tied to hardcoded file names and numbers; if the RFC directory structure evolves, this could become fragile, so you might want to centralize RFC metadata (e.g., in a manifest) and drive the test from that instead.

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[HsiangNianian]

@fu050409 All required checks are green. This PR records the human acceptance of the four remaining M1 RFCs and is ready for approval; auto-merge is enabled.

[HsiangNianian]

@fu050409 Friendly reminder: this M1 RFC acceptance PR is still awaiting the required Code Owner approval. All checks remain green and auto-merge is enabled.

[fu050409]

lgtm