[ragnorc]

Reverts #1190 (a9b8bcc). The RFC was merged while it was still a draft under review; it should have stayed an open pull request. This restores the three RFC cross-references and the registry row to their pre-#1190 state and removes the draft document from main. A fresh pull request re-opens the RFC text for continued review.

No code change; python3 scripts/check-docs.py passes.

[ragnorc]

Recommendation: ready.

Why

Pull request #1190 put a draft RFC on main while review was still open. A draft in the registry can be read as a decision. This pull request removes that draft from main.

What

Commit daaa64f1f2f5a08d707a7d9c09220d2548cd44ca is the exact inverse of a9b8bcc2ce39b2cf0adfb9ec71af256061e80f85 (#1190). It deletes docs/rfcs/2026-10-29-remote-optimize-through-the-serving-owner.md. It restores the registry row and the three pending-amendment notes to the pre-#1190 text. The removed RFC had status: draft and implementation: not-started. Its notes said the three RFC bodies stay as they are until acceptance. Those bodies are unchanged.

The restored updated dates are 2026-10-20 (RFC 0011 and the server-runtime RFC) and 2026-10-25 (the graph-access RFC). Those are the pre-#1190 values.

How

git diff a9b8bcc2^ a9b8bcc2 and git diff daaa64f1 daaa64f1^ are the same bytes. The four files that remain have the same blob as a9b8bcc2^:

• docs/rfcs/0011-cli-addressing-and-config.md (7afaa8f8)
• docs/rfcs/2026-09-29-server-runtime-and-online-deployment.md (d2d25510)
• docs/rfcs/2026-10-16-graph-access-serving-and-cross-process-writes.md (b62d36a7)
• docs/rfcs/README.md (5b8afb7a)

No commit between #1190 and current origin/main (14815c6e) edits those five paths. Later edits to docs/rfcs/0059-config-cli-coherency.md and docs/rfcs/2026-09-29-identity-credentials-and-applied-policy.md stay in the tree. A search for 2026-10-29-remote-optimize-through-the-serving-owner at this head finds no match.

Impact

The observable contract does not change. optimize is still a direct storage command (cli_only("optimize", STORAGE) at crates/omnigraph-api-types/src/operations.rs line 624).

Decision 11 in docs/rfcs/0011-cli-addressing-and-config.md (lines 536-547) still says maintenance stays direct until a follow-up RFC lands, and that it runs out of band, never inline in serving. The server-runtime RFC (line 811) still says no job queue and no second durable operation record. The graph-access RFC (line 284) still lists optimize under "Runs where the storage is" for a direct target. No crate on main contains maintenance.json or a startOptimize route.

This removes liability. main no longer keeps an unreviewed draft beside accepted decisions. The proposal text remains in a9b8bcc2 and on ragnorc/omnigraph branch rfc/remote-optimize-reopen. This change adds no API, no state, and no invariant.

Blocking findings

None.

Optional findings

None in this diff.

Alignment

Drafts #1204 and #1205 do not add the removed path. Their descriptions link the fork copy and say they stay drafts until the RFC is accepted. #1186 is a different served-optimize proposal (docs/rfcs/2026-10-25-served-optimization.md) and does not link this file. #1197 does not link it either.

#1201 and #1202 insert a registry row while the removed row is still hunk context (@@ -254,4 +254,5). After this merges, rebase those two. Do not restore the row. A context line is not an added link, so a normal rebase drops it. #1186 and #1197 target the table ending that this revert restores (@@ -254,3 +254,4), so they do not carry this row.

No open pull request on this repository puts the RFC file back yet. That matches the split in this description: revert here, and reopen the text in a new pull request. #1175's description still names merged #1190 as the living RFC. That description is outside this diff.

Tradeoff

The proposal is absent from main until the new pull request exists. That cost is right. The registry on main is the source of truth for decisions. A draft under review belongs in an open pull request. Correctness of that record comes before keeping the draft text nearby.

Validation

Head reviewed: daaa64f1f2f5a08d707a7d9c09220d2548cd44ca. Revert parent and current origin/main: 14815c6ed39d04b11a78cbe5b1595eadf9b8d001. Reverted commit: a9b8bcc2ce39b2cf0adfb9ec71af256061e80f85.

Local, in a detached worktree at that head:

• The patch comparison above matches byte for byte.
• python3 scripts/check-docs.py prints Documentation OK (430 Markdown files checked).
• bash scripts/check-agents-md.sh prints AGENTS.md ↔ docs indexes OK (66 links, 62 docs); engine reads no setting variable.
• git diff --check origin/main...HEAD is clean.
• git grep for the removed filename at the head returns no matches.

CI run 40914269203 is on this same head:

• Job Check AGENTS.md Links has head_sha daaa64f1f2f5a08d707a7d9c09220d2548cd44ca and succeeded. The log shows Documentation OK (430 Markdown files checked), the AGENTS.md check, and the spelling step.
• Classify Changes set run_full_ci=false and run_gqt=false for these five RFC paths.

GQT regression proof does not apply. This pull request changes only RFC documents. It does not change query rows, counts, types, or errors.

Limitations

I did not run the GQT corpus. I did not re-read the Lance compaction pages. This diff does not change storage code. I did check that main still exposes optimize only as a direct command, and that no crate writes __cluster/maintenance.json.

typos is not installed in this environment. The CI spelling step on this head completed inside the successful docs job.

I read the open pull request list and the README diffs that can touch this registry row. I did not rebuild every open branch.