01 · PROBLEM
One intent fans out to forks of many repos; lands in dependency order with a recovery protocol (not atomic promise, per Codex X6).
02 · HYPOTHESIS
Change set object lists repos + order; agents work per repo fork; platform tests consumers against producer candidate; lands in order; on failure, rolls forward/back per protocol.
03 · EVIDENCE SO FAR
LATESTNot tested. The agents gathered reports of the pain behind this idea and scored it on paper only; no experiment has been run on it. Cited pain: worktrees break across repos, "the git remote becomes the only integration point" (E-C361); multi-repo coordination (E-C108).website/projects.json
04 · NEXT FALSIFICATION TEST
Not yet scheduled. Smallest demo on record: 3 repos (lib, service, client); API rename landed in order with consumer tests.
StatusParked; investigate-first, must beat the existing deploy-check tools
We would drop or park it ifIf the recovery protocol cannot restore consistency after an injected mid-sequence failure, kill.