docs(changelog): cut 0.1.0 — the version the two open gaps allow

The repo has never had a tag, so this is version one. The number is chosen
from maturity, not from habit: the shared spec's V1 `generated` shape is
landed upstream but not adopted here (the golden is the library's emission,
so adoption is gated on the ingest pin swap), and the SDK pin reaches
further than the range whose premises are source-verified. Both gaps are
held open by tests on purpose. 1.0.0 would claim a settled surface this
implementation does not have.

pyproject.toml already declares 0.1.0 and needs no change; README carries
three badges, none of them versioned, and src/ declares no __version__ —
enumerated, not assumed, so nothing else can drift from the tag.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014eYPddPVYPMxc5L7a4nxvA
This commit is contained in:
Kjell Tore Guttormsen 2026-08-17 13:33:19 +02:00
commit 0b69354c74

View file

@ -7,6 +7,8 @@ and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0
## [Unreleased]
## [0.1.0] - 2026-08-17
### Added
**The method, implemented (D7).** Sibling implementation of the portfolio-optimiser method
@ -52,6 +54,14 @@ reverse-engineering the MAF sibling.
### Notes
- **Why `0.1.0` and not `1.0.0`.** Two gaps are documented and deliberately held open rather
than papered over: the frozen spec's §7 `generated` shape (V1) has landed in the shared spec
but is *not* yet adopted in the goldens — the golden is the library's own emission, so
adoption is gated on the ingest-library pin swap, and
`test_ingest_stamp_conformance_loadbearing.py` is the ratchet that goes red the moment a
`materialize()` run reaches the new shape. And the SDK pin (`>=0.2.111,<0.3`) reaches further
than the range whose premises are source-verified (through 0.2.110). A `1.0.0` would claim a
settled surface this implementation does not yet have.
- Honesty rule (method spec §1): no artifact in this repo claims more than the implementation
does. Scripted stand-ins are labelled as such, unbuilt extension points are named as
unbuilt, and a figure the data does not carry is reported unmarked rather than back-filled.