Personal delivery setup
Code Factory
My Code Factory turns a bounded work order into candidate software through isolated implementation, independent QA and read-only review.
Current status
Working local setup
This is a transparent account of a working setup, not a product or security certification.
A coding agent can produce a convincing diff quickly. That is not the same as producing software worth merging. The factory is designed around candidate identity, reproducible tests and separation of responsibility.
How it works
Brief
Scope, base, constraints and acceptance commands are frozen.
Build
A role worker implements inside an isolated worktree.
Test
The real repository gates run against the candidate.
Challenge
Independent QA and review try to disprove completion.
Handoff
Exact evidence reaches the human merge gate.
Operating principles
Bind the work
Every run starts from a named repository, approved base, allowed scope and executable acceptance commands. Project context is explicit rather than guessed from whichever folder changed most recently.
Isolate the candidate
An implementer works in an isolated worktree and leaves a branch, exact commit and test evidence. The temporary workspace is execution space, not an archive.
Do not let builders certify themselves
September 2026 update: independent QA checks behavior, and cross-model review challenges the immutable candidate. These checks supplement reproducible tests and human judgment.
Stop at the human gate
The factory can make a candidate ready for a decision. It does not merge, deploy, change pricing or run a migration on its own.
Evidence ledger
Private artifacts are described, not exposed. Public references establish the underlying platform primitives, not the behavior of my implementation.
Claims tied to primary artifacts
CF-01
The August operating-proof change to this site was built in a dedicated worktree from a named base and frozen into exact commits before review.
- Primary evidence
- Historical primary artifact: the 11factor Git history and clean-worktree receipts for the August operating-proof change.
- Verified
- Branch, base, exact candidate head and worktree status were checked at every review gate on 29 August 2026.
- Boundary
- One traceable candidate is evidence of the method, not a throughput benchmark.
CF-02
Passing local checks was not accepted as proof of completion.
- Primary evidence
- Historical primary artifact: the August operating-proof candidate passed source and build checks, but independent review exposed narrow-screen overflow, theme, contrast and route-metadata defects.
- Verified
- Each defect was reproduced by a browser contract, fixed, and rerun with the source suite on 29 August 2026.
- Boundary
- A successful remediation cycle does not show that reviewers catch every defect.
CF-03
Review evidence is bound to an immutable candidate while merge and deployment stay outside the worker path.
- Primary evidence
- Historical primary artifact: the August operating-proof change received exact-range RoboRev receipts and read-only independent review while remaining on a dedicated feature branch.
- Verified
- Review ranges and clean worktree state were inspected before remote handoff on 29 August 2026.
- Boundary
- This is a process and tooling boundary, not a cryptographic guarantee against a compromised operator.
What this does not prove
- Passing the factory gates does not prove product-market fit, production health or customer value.
- Review tools can miss defects. Real tests, independent judgment and post-release evidence still matter.
- The public description explains the method without exposing private repositories, worker identities or infrastructure topology.
Related framework