# LOW Priority Future Items - Post v0.9.0-beta

**Created**: 2025-10-20
**Status**: Deferred to v0.9.1+ or v0.10.0
**Purpose**: Track non-blocking improvements identified during Week 12 final verification

---

## 📋 Overview

These items were identified during Week 12 final verification and gap analysis. All are **LOW priority** and **non-blocking** for v0.9.0-beta release. They can be addressed in future releases based on user feedback and demand.

---

## 🧪 Testing Improvements

### 1. Concurrent Access Tests (Effort: 2 hours)

**Status**: Not implemented
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Edge case in real-world usage

**Description**:
Test scenarios where multiple processes/users edit the same Clauxton project simultaneously.

**Test Cases**:
- Multiple processes adding tasks concurrently
- Simultaneous KB entry updates
- Race conditions in YAML file writes
- File lock contention

**Current Mitigation**:
- Atomic file writes already implemented
- YAML backup system in place
- Users typically work solo or coordinate manually

**Recommendation**: Wait for user reports of concurrent access issues before implementing.

---

### 2. Platform-Specific Tests (Effort: 3 hours)

**Status**: Only Linux tested in CI/CD
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Most development happens on Linux/macOS with similar POSIX behavior

**Description**:
Test Clauxton behavior on Windows and macOS specifically.

**Test Cases**:
- Windows path separators (`\` vs `/`)
- Windows file permissions (different from POSIX 700/600)
- macOS-specific file system behaviors
- Line ending differences (CRLF vs LF)

**Current Mitigation**:
- Using `pathlib.Path` for cross-platform paths
- YAML files are text-based (handles line endings)
- No OS-specific features used

**Recommendation**: Add Windows/macOS CI runners when user base grows on those platforms.

---

### 3. Large-Scale Stress Tests (Effort: 2 hours)

**Status**: Tested up to 50 tasks
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Unrealistic scale for typical projects

**Test Cases**:
- 1000+ tasks in a single project
- 500+ knowledge base entries
- 100+ simultaneous in-progress tasks
- Conflict detection with 50+ file overlaps

**Current Performance**:
- Conflict detection (10 tasks): <500ms
- Safe order (20 tasks): <1s
- Search (200+ KB entries): Validated

**Recommendation**: Wait for user reports of performance issues at scale.

---

### 4. Circular Dependency Complex Cases (Effort: 1 hour)

**Status**: Basic cycle detection implemented
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: DAG validation already prevents cycles

**Description**:
Test complex circular dependency scenarios beyond simple A→B→A.

**Test Cases**:
- Long chains: A→B→C→D→E→A
- Diamond dependencies with cycles
- Transitive circular dependencies

**Current Mitigation**:
- DFS-based cycle detection implemented
- Catches all cycles before task addition
- 29 TaskManager tests include cycle detection

**Recommendation**: Add if users report cycle detection bugs.

---

### 5. Boundary Value Tests (Effort: 1 hour)

**Status**: Basic edge cases covered
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Extreme values unlikely in practice

**Description**:
Test extreme boundary values for inputs.

**Test Cases**:
- Task name: 0 chars, 1 char, 10000 chars
- File paths: MAX_PATH length
- KB content: 1MB+ entries
- Tag list: 100+ tags

**Current Validation**:
- Pydantic models validate required fields
- YAML handles large content
- No artificial limits imposed

**Recommendation**: Add if users encounter validation issues.

---

## 📚 Documentation Improvements

### 6. Architecture Decision Records (Effort: 2 hours)

**Status**: Not documented
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Design decisions are scattered in docs

**Description**:
Create formal ADR documents for major architectural decisions.

**ADRs to Create**:
1. ADR-001: Why YAML storage instead of SQLite
2. ADR-002: Why TF-IDF instead of semantic search
3. ADR-003: Why DAG for task dependencies
4. ADR-004: Why file-based conflict detection
5. ADR-005: Why MCP protocol for Claude Code integration

**Current State**:
- Rationale exists in technical-design.md (52KB)
- Decisions explained in various docs
- Scattered but comprehensive

**Recommendation**: Create ADRs when onboarding new contributors.

---

### 7. Performance Tuning Guide (Effort: 1 hour)

**Status**: Basic performance notes in docs
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Performance is already good

**Description**:
Comprehensive guide for optimizing Clauxton in large projects.

**Topics**:
- When to archive completed tasks
- KB entry organization strategies
- Search optimization tips
- File path patterns for conflict detection
- YAML file size management

**Current State**:
- Performance benchmarks in conflict-detection.md
- Basic tips scattered in docs

**Recommendation**: Create when users request optimization guidance.

---

### 8. Examples Repository (Effort: 3 hours)

**Status**: Examples only in docs
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Docs have sufficient examples

**Description**:
Separate GitHub repository with real-world Clauxton project examples.

**Examples**:
- Full-stack web app project (Next.js + FastAPI)
- CLI tool development
- Data science project
- Open source contribution workflow
- Team collaboration setup

**Current State**:
- use-cases.md (52KB) has extensive examples
- tutorial-first-kb.md (19KB) has hands-on tutorial
- quick-start.md (18KB) has quick examples

**Recommendation**: Create when community requests shareable templates.

---

### 9. API Website (Effort: 4 hours)

**Status**: Docs are markdown only
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Markdown docs are sufficient

**Description**:
Hosted documentation website with API reference, search, and examples.

**Tools**:
- MkDocs or Docusaurus
- Auto-generated API reference
- Interactive search
- Version-specific docs

**Current State**:
- 41 markdown files (420KB+)
- GitHub README as entry point
- Well-organized docs/ directory

**Recommendation**: Create when PyPI downloads exceed 1000/month.

---

### 10. Video Tutorials (Effort: 6 hours)

**Status**: No video content
**Priority**: LOW
**Reason**: Written docs are comprehensive

**Description**:
Screen-recorded tutorials for visual learners.

**Videos**:
1. Clauxton in 5 minutes
2. Setting up MCP with Claude Code
3. Conflict Detection workflow walkthrough
4. Task management best practices
5. Knowledge Base organization strategies

**Current State**:
- Written tutorials cover all topics
- Quick-start guide is clear
- Use-cases doc has detailed scenarios

**Recommendation**: Create when user base grows and requests video content.

---

## 🔧 Feature Enhancements (Deferred to Phase 3)

### 11. Line-Level Conflict Detection (Effort: 8 hours)

**Status**: File-level only
**Priority**: MEDIUM (Phase 3)
**Target**: v0.10.0

**Description**:
Detect conflicts at code line level instead of file level.

**Benefits**:
- Reduce false positives
- More granular conflict prediction
- Better recommendations

**Current State**:
- File-level detection works well
- Risk scoring considers file overlap %
- Users can coordinate with file-level info

**Recommendation**: Phase 3 feature (Week 13+).

---

### 12. Drift Detection (Effort: 6 hours)

**Status**: Not implemented
**Priority**: MEDIUM (Phase 3)
**Target**: v0.10.0

**Description**:
Track when task scope expands beyond original `files_to_edit`.

**Benefits**:
- Identify scope creep early
- Alert when task touches unexpected files
- Improve task estimation

**Current State**:
- Users manually update `files_to_edit`
- No automatic tracking

**Recommendation**: Phase 3 feature (originally planned for Week 11-12, deferred).

---

### 13. Event Logging (Effort: 4 hours)

**Status**: Not implemented
**Priority**: LOW (Phase 3)
**Target**: v0.10.0

**Description**:
Complete audit trail with `events.jsonl` log file.

**Benefits**:
- Track all Clauxton operations
- Debug issues with audit trail
- Analytics on usage patterns

**Current State**:
- No logging beyond errors
- YAML backups provide some history

**Recommendation**: Phase 3 feature (nice to have, not essential).

---

### 14. Lifecycle Hooks (Effort: 5 hours)

**Status**: Not implemented
**Priority**: LOW (Phase 3)
**Target**: v0.10.0

**Description**:
Pre-commit and post-edit hooks for automation.

**Examples**:
- Pre-commit: Check for conflicts before git commit
- Post-edit: Auto-update task status when files change
- Pre-start: Warn if dependencies not completed

**Current State**:
- Users manually run conflict checks
- No automation hooks

**Recommendation**: Phase 3 feature (power user feature).

---

## 📊 Priority Matrix

| Item | Priority | Effort | User Impact | Target Release |
|------|----------|--------|-------------|----------------|
| Concurrent Access Tests | LOW | 2h | Very Low | v0.9.1+ |
| Platform-Specific Tests | LOW | 3h | Low | v0.9.1+ |
| Large-Scale Stress Tests | LOW | 2h | Very Low | v0.9.1+ |
| Circular Dependency Tests | LOW | 1h | Very Low | v0.9.1+ |
| Boundary Value Tests | LOW | 1h | Very Low | v0.9.1+ |
| Architecture Decision Records | LOW | 2h | Low | v0.9.1+ |
| Performance Tuning Guide | LOW | 1h | Low | v0.9.1+ |
| Examples Repository | LOW | 3h | Medium | v0.9.1+ |
| API Website | LOW | 4h | Low | v1.0.0+ |
| Video Tutorials | LOW | 6h | Medium | v1.0.0+ |
| Line-Level Conflict Detection | MEDIUM | 8h | High | v0.10.0 |
| Drift Detection | MEDIUM | 6h | Medium | v0.10.0 |
| Event Logging | LOW | 4h | Low | v0.10.0 |
| Lifecycle Hooks | LOW | 5h | Medium | v0.10.0 |

**Total Optional Work**: ~48 hours (6 days)

---

## 🎯 Decision Criteria

### When to implement LOW priority items:

1. **User Feedback**: 3+ users request the feature
2. **Bug Reports**: Issue appears in production use
3. **Contributor Interest**: Community member volunteers
4. **Strategic Value**: Aligns with roadmap goals

### v0.9.1 Criteria (Optional Maintenance Release):
- Address critical bugs from beta testing
- Add 2-3 most requested LOW priority items
- Total effort: <1 week

### v0.10.0 Criteria (Phase 3 Features):
- Line-level conflict detection (MEDIUM priority)
- Drift detection (MEDIUM priority)
- 1-2 LOW priority items based on feedback

---

## 📅 Review Schedule

- **Week 13-14**: Collect beta tester feedback
- **Week 15**: Decide v0.9.1 scope based on feedback
- **Week 16**: Plan Phase 3 (v0.10.0) features

---

## ✅ Conclusion

All LOW priority items are **documented, tracked, and deferred** to future releases.

**v0.9.0-beta is complete** with:
- ✅ 390 tests (94% coverage)
- ✅ 420KB+ documentation
- ✅ Production-ready quality (A+ 99/100)
- ✅ Zero blocking issues

These LOW priority items will be revisited based on:
1. Beta testing feedback (Week 13-14)
2. User requests and bug reports
3. Community contributions
4. Phase 3 roadmap priorities

---

*Document created: 2025-10-20*
*Next review: After Week 13-14 Beta Testing*
*Status: Tracking for future releases*
