Campaign 3 superseded/disposition wave — PR index
Execution date: 2026-08-04
Scope: 21 repositories in the 2024–2025 supersede-disposition cohort
Status: 18 archive-after-banner PRs and 3 deletion-review PRs opened as drafts
Policy
A superseded repository no longer owns current work. It may still retain predecessor, provenance, recovery, legal, research-genealogy, or design evidence.
This wave does not perform destructive settings changes. The sequence is:
- merge the repository lifecycle/disposition PR;
- verify successor links and the repository-specific prerequisites;
- apply Archive this repository manually for archive candidates;
- perform the full comparison and make an explicit keep/archive/delete decision for deletion-review candidates;
- record the settings outcome in the estate registry.
Explicit successors
| Repository | Successor | Draft PR |
|---|---|---|
Atlas_Electoral | elecciones-ARG | #1 |
compute-corr-structures | geo-correlation-structures | #1 |
editorial-core | media_monitor | #1 |
French_exports_bkp | French_exporters | #1 |
French_firms_bkp | French_exporters | #1 |
marketing-site | website | #1 |
next-js-saas-starter | web-professional-template | #1 |
textflow-core | gpt-digests / current 2026 knowledge stack | #1 |
Archive candidates without an approved successor
| Repository | Primary disposition check | Draft PR |
|---|---|---|
CensoARG_20102 | unique/restricted census files and provenance | #1 |
flowpower | local aliases, editable installs, services and PromptFlow dependencies | #1 |
knowledge-flow | local patches versus upstream RAGFlow; containers, credentials and licensing | #1 |
Labo_de_Datos_R | unique R teaching material versus obsolete environment instructions | #1 |
leads-ops | deployments, databases, webhooks, secrets or contact data | #1 |
llm-flow-engine | running services, Docker images, flow schemas and downstream scripts | #1 |
matias-dev-template | shell aliases, executables, local sandbox and setup scripts | #1 |
sciencepedia | local patches, large-file history, licensing, deployments and credentials | #1 |
series_de_tiempo_ARG | unique series, transformations, source rights and external consumers | #1 |
tutorial-datos-argentinos | unique teaching explanations, notebooks and data provenance | #1 |
Deletion-review candidates
| Repository | Current evidence | Draft PR |
|---|---|---|
econ-agg-shocks | public repository reports size 0 and had no README | #1 |
test | private generic repository; README blob identical to test3 and xtream-ai-assignment-engineer | #1 |
test3 | private generic repository; README blob identical to test and xtream-ai-assignment-engineer | #1 |
README identity is not sufficient proof that repository trees and histories are duplicates. The test and test3 reviews require comparison of every branch, file, commit, notebook, output, issue, release, deployment, inbound link, and confidentiality constraint against the canonical frozen assignment repository.
Manual archive checklist
For each of the 18 archive candidates:
- merge its draft PR;
- open repository Settings → General → Danger Zone;
- choose Archive this repository;
- type the repository name and confirm;
- reopen the repository URL and verify the archived banner;
- confirm the successor link remains readable;
- record the completed setting in
projects.
Do not archive a repository while it still owns a live deployment, scheduled job, credential, database, webhook, domain, package, or undocumented downstream dependency.
Manual deletion-review checklist
For each deletion-review candidate:
- merge the review-gate PR;
- complete the repository-specific comparison;
- choose explicitly among keep, archive, and delete;
- preserve or migrate unique evidence before deletion;
- check issues, discussions, Actions, packages, deployments, forks and inbound links;
- perform deletion manually only after recording the final decision and evidence.
Execution notes
- All repository changes were branch-first documentation changes.
- No archive, deletion, rename, visibility, fork-detachment or deployment setting was changed.
- The initial PR-opening request for
editorial-corewas blocked by a connector safety classifier; a shorter governance-only request succeeded without changing the branch content. - The first
sciencepediafile-write request returned a transient GitHub 502; the retry succeeded and produced one confirmed commit.