# Session Log - 2026-09-01

Agent: Claude Code
Model: Claude Sonnet 5 (claude-sonnet-5)
P4 identity used: bot_Claude_Anthropic (except where noted)

## Summary

Picking up from `SessionLog-2026-08-29.md` (which ran through 2026-08-31).
Refreshed Public Depot and PPN tickets to full 24h; confirmed JIRA write
access still present; no dangling opened files anywhere. Closed out the
AWS EBS Name-tag loose end for good. Started Task 5 (Redesign SDP Release
Process): read `doc/ReleaseProcessOverview.md` end to end, then had a
substantial design discussion with the user defining the actual Streams
topology, patch-release model, and several concrete doc/tooling fixes.
No rewrite of `ReleaseProcessOverview.md` itself yet -- that's the next
session's main task, now that the design questions below are settled.

## Where Things Stand

- **Tasks 1-4: done.** SDP-1170 remains open, folded into Task 5 scope.
- **Task 5 (Redesign SDP Release Process): design phase, in progress.**
  Key decisions made today (see Timeline for full detail):
  - Stream topology confirmed: `main` (mainline) -> `dev` (long-lived,
    always release-ready) -> `dev_*` short-lived per-task streams (e.g.
    `dev_rebrand`, future `dev_SDP-<n>`). Small/low-risk/urgent work can
    go straight to `dev`; larger/riskier work starts in a `dev_*` stream.
  - **Patch model decided**: uniform `dev` -> `main` -> release flow for
    *everything*, including patches -- no patching directly in an old
    release stream (avoids a second, backflow merge direction). A patch
    between majors just means cutting a fresh release stream from `main`
    (e.g. `r26.1.1`, `r26.1.2`, ...). Considering `r26.1.0` for GA to make
    the numbering scheme consistent up front.
  - JIRA `Fix versions` naming (adding `.0` for GA to match) is explicitly
    **on hold** -- user wants to check with Brent (P4 Product Owner) on
    whether SDP should match however P4-proper does `Fix versions`, before
    deciding.
  - Doc/script version regeneration sequencing: front-load doc/revnumber
    prep in `main`; do one final regen pass in the release stream once
    cut, since RCS-keyword-derived script versions differ per stream.
    Confirmed acceptable that docs viewed on `main` will show "MAIN" in
    version tags rather than a release number -- that's accurate, not a
    bug, and consistent with the relative-link doc strategy from the
    prior session.
  - No formal release-stream pruning/retirement -- P4 has no "inactive
    stream" concept, so old release streams (`r26.1.0` etc.) just stay
    around indefinitely once superseded by patches. Confirmed fine.
  - `cd`-command inconsistency in the old doc: fix by establishing
    `WSRoot=$(p4 -ztag -F %clientRoot% info)` early and using
    `cd "$WSRoot/<subdir>"` throughout the rewrite, instead of the old
    doc's inconsistent relative `cd` chains.
  - `tools/` packaging gap found and fixed (see Timeline) -- real
    regression from the Classic->Streams migration, not yet released.
  - Open item flagged by user for next time: the "SDP Health Checks"
    section of `doc/ReleaseNotes.adoc` may need a URL update now that
    `tools/` is excluded from packaging -- checked today, and the
    existing download URL there already correctly points at
    `Server/Unix/p4/common/bin/sdp_health_check.sh`, not `tools/`, so
    this may already be fine. Needs a final confirm next session (maybe
    there's a different stale reference elsewhere).
- Stream housekeeping clarified (no action needed): `dev_c2s` is done and
  retired (merged into `dev_rebrand`); `dev_rebrand2` was aborted;
  `dev_SDP-1265`/`dev_SDP-1267` are experimental placeholders (Version-file
  isolation testing, and an empty placeholder respectively) that may or may
  not ever be used.
- Loose ends carried over, still open, not urgent:
  - SDP-1170 (Migrate Classic->Streams URLs/redirects) -- part of Task 5.
  - SDP-1383 / SDP-1384 (Priority Backlog) -- ccheck.sh version-awareness,
    Python/Perl version identification.
  - SDP-1050 -- p4dstate.sh/p4pstate.sh/p4brokerstate.sh overhaul.
  - SDP-568 -- exec/tee logging standardization, deferred to 2026.2.
  - HMS URL fixes -- blocked on `p4-hms` depot population.
  - `tools/sdp_health_check.sh` -- confirmed stale duplicate of the real
    `Server/Unix/p4/common/bin/sdp_health_check.sh`; harmless (now
    excluded from packaging either way), worth deleting eventually as
    plain cleanup, not urgent.

## Timeline

### AWS EBS Name-tag loose end (closed)

Confirmed the risk was real, not hypothetical: checked the actual AWS
account this environment has access to (`helix-bsw-bot`, account
572096036492) and found a live, in-use host, `perforce-01`, whose EBS
volumes were still tagged `perforce-01-hxdepots`/`perforce-01-hxlogs` (the
pre-2026.1-rebrand convention) while `snapshot.sh` (since change 33326)
only matches `p4depots`/`p4logs`. Fixed both ends:

- `snapshot.sh` (change 33395): added a `LegacyVolumeBaseName` fallback --
  if the current-style Name tag isn't found, retries the pre-rebrand tag
  name and warns that the volume should be re-tagged, rather than
  silently skipping it. Added a comment block explaining the Name-tag
  convention and that it must stay in sync with real AWS tags on live
  production volumes. Verified the fallback logic with a mocked `aws` CLI
  reproducing the exact `perforce-01` scenario.
- Renamed the real AWS EBS tags on `perforce-01`'s two volumes to
  `perforce-01-p4depots`/`perforce-01-p4logs`, confirmed via
  `describe-volumes`. This was flagged to the user as a live-infrastructure
  change before doing it, given their go-ahead.

Never shipped in a release, so no separate JIRA issue -- folded directly
into this fix as "just an outcome of the rebranding."

### Task 5 kickoff: ReleaseProcessOverview.md read + design discussion

Read the whole 18-step document. It's detailed and clearly still useful in
spirit, but a lot of it is written for the old Classic-depot
branch-and-merge model (`p4 merge -b perforce_software-sdp-dev`, an
`mdcu.sh` script, mixed `//guest/perforce_software/sdp/dev/...` and
`//p4-sdp/...` paths) and needs a real Streams-native rework, not
search-and-replace.

Before proposing a rewrite, surfaced the most load-bearing open question:
what's the actual relationship between `//p4-sdp/dev`, `//p4-sdp/dev_rebrand`,
and `//p4-sdp/main`? Grounded this against the real depot via `p4 stream -o`
and `p4 streams //p4-sdp/...` rather than guessing, which is what surfaced
the full topology (see below) and the extra streams (`dev_c2s`,
`dev_rebrand2`, `dev_SDP-1265`, `dev_SDP-1267`) not otherwise mentioned.

User's response (this is the actual design-definition conversation for
Task 5, not documentation of an already-decided design -- "the intended
stream workflow will be exercised for the first time with this release"):

**Stream topology**:
- `main` (`mainline`, parent none) -- long-lived, stable, reflects the
  latest shipped release. Confirmed via `p4 stream -o`: has both
  `isolate ai_dev_support/...` and `isolate Version` already set.
- Release streams (e.g. `r26.1`) -- long-lived, generally stable except
  briefly during the release process itself (doc regen, heavy retesting).
  None exist yet.
- `dev` (`development`, parent `main`) -- long-lived, always has WIP, but
  always kept release-ready/stable enough to ship on short notice.
- `dev_*` project streams (`development` type; `sparsedev` was tried but
  doesn't support fetch/push, so plain `development` is used per-developer
  choice instead) -- short-lived, per-task, parented by `dev`. Naming
  convention: can be issue-specific, e.g. a future `dev_SDP-568`.
- Developers choose where to start work: small/low-risk/hyper-urgent work
  can go straight to `dev`; larger/higher-risk work should start in a
  `dev_*` stream first (confirmed with the user: an earlier "or high-risk
  ... can go right to dev" in their own phrasing was a typo, not intended).

**Patch model -- the one substantive decision made today**: the original
doc's implicit model (patch directly in an old release stream, then
presumably backflow into `main` to keep it current) was rejected as too
much complexity for a small team -- it requires two merge directions
instead of one. Decided instead: patches follow the exact same
`dev` -> `main` -> release flow as any other change; a patch between
majors just means cutting a *new* release stream from `main`
(`r26.1.1`, `r26.1.2`, ...). Since `dev` is designed to always be
release-ready, this costs no speed even for urgent fixes. Naming: possibly
`r26.1.0` for GA (not yet `r26.1`) so the numbering scheme is consistent
from the start -- this would deliberately diverge from JIRA's existing
`Fix versions` convention (`2026.1`, no `.0`), which is fine since they're
different systems, but needs to be documented clearly so it's not
confusing. Whether to *also* change the JIRA convention to add `.0` for GA
is explicitly on hold pending the user's conversation with Brent (P4
Product Owner) about whether SDP should match P4-proper's own convention.

No formal release-stream retirement/pruning -- P4 has no "mark inactive"
stream feature (a long-standing, known gap the user has already requested
upstream), so old release streams just accumulate and stay around
indefinitely once superseded. Confirmed fine, no action needed unless/until
that feature exists.

One nice side effect noted: since patches and GA releases now run through
an *identical* mechanism (just gated by "major releases only" step-skips,
which the old doc already used for some steps), the redesigned doc's
overall shape probably won't need to change much -- patch and GA
procedures collapse into one, which is a simplification, not just a
relabeling.

**Doc/script version regeneration sequencing** (a real technical
constraint, not just a design preference): because script versions are now
derived from `$Id:$`/`$Change:$` RCS keywords (SDP-1161/SDP-799), the same
script's `-man` output -- and therefore the generated docs built from it --
will show different version strings in different streams, even when the
content is otherwise identical, since submitting/integrating a file into a
new stream changes its `$Change:$` value. Plan: do as much doc prep as
possible in `main` (revnumbers, etc.), then do one final regen pass in the
release stream right after cutting it, to pick up correct per-release
version strings. Confirmed with the user that `main`'s own docs will
legitimately show "MAIN" in version tags in the meantime (e.g.
`MAIN.33368` instead of `R26.1.0.33368`) -- judged this is fine, even
good: it's an honest signal to the reader that they're viewing the rolling
`main`, not a specific release, which fits naturally with the relative-link
doc strategy adopted the prior session.

**Stream housekeeping** (no action needed, just status confirmed by user):
`dev_c2s` (Classic-to-Streams migration work) is done and retired, already
merged into `dev_rebrand`. `dev_rebrand2` was an aborted attempt.
`dev_SDP-1265` (an experiment with how the isolated `Version` file behaves)
and `dev_SDP-1267` (an empty placeholder) are just sitting there,
unresolved, possibly never to be used -- fine as-is; if ever merged down,
the only effect will be bumping the changelist number on their `share`
line, since they have no other resident files.

**Concrete fixes made today, arising directly from this discussion**:

1. `tools/excludes.downloads.cfg`: added `D:ai_dev_support` (change 33398)
   and, after checking real packaging behavior, `D:tools` (change 33401).
   In the Classic structure, `tools/` lived outside the dev/main branches
   entirely and was never a packaging concern; the Classic->Streams
   migration moved it inside the stream tree, where
   `package_downloads.sh`'s `cp -pr <stream>/... $SDPRoot` now sweeps it
   into the customer tarball unless excluded. Verified `tools/` contains
   only release-engineering tooling; the one file that looked
   customer-facing (`sdp_health_check.sh`) already has its real, correct,
   customer-shipped copy at `Server/Unix/p4/common/bin/sdp_health_check.sh`,
   so nothing real is lost by excluding `tools/`. Confirmed only one
   directory named `tools` exists anywhere in the tree, so the exclusion
   can't accidentally catch anything else.
2. Along the way, hit a real (harmless) self-inflicted mistake: edited
   `excludes.downloads.cfg` a second time via the Edit tool without
   re-running `p4 edit` first (the file had gone read-only again after the
   first submit). The edit silently succeeded on disk anyway -- `p4
   opened` correctly showed nothing open, and `p4 submit` correctly said
   "No files to submit" since nothing was tracked, so no harm done, but it
   confirms the Edit tool has the exact same rename()-based read-only
   bypass previously seen with `sed -i`. Fixed properly (`p4 edit` picked
   up the existing on-disk diff cleanly) and broadened the existing
   `feedback_sed_bypasses_p4_readonly` memory to cover this: the rule
   isn't "watch out right after sed," it's "`p4 edit` unconditionally
   before touching any tracked file with any tool, every time."
3. Established the `WSRoot=$(p4 -ztag -F %clientRoot% info)` idiom to fix
   the old doc's inconsistent `cd` commands -- to be applied throughout
   the `ReleaseProcessOverview.md` rewrite next session.
4. User flagged the "SDP Health Checks" section of `doc/ReleaseNotes.adoc`
   as possibly needing a URL update now that `tools/` is excluded from
   packaging. Checked today: the existing download URL there already
   points at `Server/Unix/p4/common/bin/sdp_health_check.sh`, not
   `tools/`, so it may already be correct -- flagged for a final confirm
   next session rather than assumed fixed or assumed broken.

## Wrap-Up

Good foundational-design day for Task 5 -- the actual stream topology and
patch model are now decided (not just documented), which is most of the
hard thinking done before the `ReleaseProcessOverview.md` rewrite itself.
Next session: write the actual rewrite, applying the `WSRoot` idiom
throughout, restructuring the merge-down/copy-up steps to match the
uniform `dev` -> `main` -> release flow (no backflow), rewriting the
Classic-era `p4 merge -b`/`mdcu.sh` mechanics to their Streams-native
equivalents, and doing the final confirm on the SDP Health Checks URL
question above. SDP-1170 (Classic->Streams URL/redirect migration) is
still open and part of this same Task 5 scope, not yet started for real.