@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ |
| 1 | +# v1.0.0 launch retro |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +**Cutover date:** TBD (filled in by the operator on launch day). |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +**Cutover window:** TBD (e.g., "Saturday 2026-MM-DD 22:00–22:45 UTC"). |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +A short, blameless retro filled in within 24 hours of the cutover. |
| 8 | +Lives in `docs/internal/retro/` so future v2/v3 launches can read |
| 9 | +the prior one and learn. |
| 10 | + |
| 11 | +## What worked |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +(Filled in post-cutover. Bullets, two sentences each. Examples |
| 14 | +from a hypothetical good run: |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +- The Ansible playbook applied first-try; ~12s downtime measured |
| 17 | + end-to-end. Lower than the 30s budget. |
| 18 | +- The smoke script caught a misconfigured Caddy header within 60s |
| 19 | + of the deploy reporting success — fixed before any user noticed. |
| 20 | +- HSTS + the Caddy default cert-renewal worked on first request; |
| 21 | + no manual cert ceremony needed.) |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +## What surprised us |
| 24 | + |
| 25 | +(Things we hadn't predicted. Honest writeups; this isn't a brag |
| 26 | +sheet.) |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +## Top 3 user-reported issues in the first 24h |
| 29 | + |
| 30 | +| # | Severity | Title | Status | |
| 31 | +|---|----------|-------|--------| |
| 32 | +| 1 | TBD | TBD | TBD | |
| 33 | +| 2 | TBD | TBD | TBD | |
| 34 | +| 3 | TBD | TBD | TBD | |
| 35 | + |
| 36 | +## Numbers |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | +| Metric | Value | |
| 39 | +|-------------------------------------------|---------| |
| 40 | +| Cutover window length | TBD | |
| 41 | +| Downtime during cutover | TBD | |
| 42 | +| Signups in first 24h | TBD | |
| 43 | +| Repos created in first 24h | TBD | |
| 44 | +| Pushes in first 24h | TBD | |
| 45 | +| Peak RPS during HN spike | TBD | |
| 46 | +| 5xx rate during HN spike | TBD | |
| 47 | +| Backups successful since cutover | TBD | |
| 48 | +| Alerts paged | TBD | |
| 49 | +| Alerts that were false positives | TBD | |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | +## What goes into the next sprint |
| 52 | + |
| 53 | +The first post-launch sprint focuses on: |
| 54 | + |
| 55 | +1. (Top user-reported issue from the table above, fix.) |
| 56 | +2. (Second-highest issue, or a parked S41+ feature if no urgent |
| 57 | + bug.) |
| 58 | +3. (Drop the GitHub mirror? Track its disposition; default plan |
| 59 | + is to keep it 90 days.) |
| 60 | + |
| 61 | +## Lessons for the next major release |
| 62 | + |
| 63 | +(Things we'd do differently for v2.0.0. Operator-facing notes, |
| 64 | +not rehash of every minor decision.) |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +## Closing |
| 67 | + |
| 68 | +shithub is now real. The v1.0.0 surface is what users will judge |
| 69 | +the project against; what we ship from here forward is judged in |
| 70 | +the context of a public, dogfood-driven instance. That's the |
| 71 | +forcing function we wanted. |
