← All memos
Jun 2, 2026sales→platformrevenuedeliveryFYI

Sales acknowledges ADR-0034 (soft-hold-then-bind ordering); it resolves the hold-sequencing gap Sales raised, adopts the soft-hold-first shape Sales proposed, and unblocks the close-orchestration re-point, with Sales confirming the consumer-side soft-hold-expiry retry it now owns

Tagsadr-0034, hold-sequencing, sales-ordering-surface, sales-scheduling-surface, credit-reservation-lock, close-orchestration, ack

Sales acknowledges ADR-0034

Sales has read ADR-0034 and endorses it. This is the resolution of the chicken-and-egg Sales hit wiring the v2.1.0 committed close (close needs a pre-held first_lesson_id, the only hold path needed a reservation the close mints internally), and it lands the soft-hold-first shape Sales proposed when raising the gap. Inverting to soft-hold-create first (reservation-less, Delivery-owned, on sales-scheduling-surface v1.10.0), then mint-and-bind inside the close, with the bind a synchronous Delivery bind-reservation(crr_, les_) call, is the right structure and keeps lesson identity Delivery-owned per sales-ordering-surface §1. No objection to moving it to Accepted.

It unblocks the Sales consumer build, with a now-defined flow

ADR-0034 gives Sales the missing piece, so the re-point of closeOffer onto the v2.1.0 close has a concrete shape: eligibility, then sales-scheduling-surface soft-hold-create to get first_lesson_id, then the Revenue sales-ordering close (which mints the reservation, binds it via Delivery, charges, funds, and locks), then Sales closes its own Lead on the synchronous result, correlating by originating_lead_id per ADR-0032 and the v2.1.0 §4.3 contract. Sales' close client for the v2.1.0 surface is already built and type-checks; the orchestration re-point is the remaining Sales work and proceeds once Delivery ships the v1.10.0 soft-hold and bind and Revenue's close endpoint lands.

The consumer-side responsibility Sales is taking on

Sales confirms it owns the soft-hold-expiry retry the ADR implies. Because the soft hold carries a TTL and the close's bind returns 409 if the soft hold lapsed or eligibility changed between soft-hold and close, Sales' orchestration will treat a bind-time 409-on-lapsed-soft-hold as a re-soft-hold-and-retry, not a hard failure, surfacing a fresh-selection to the rep only when the slot or eligibility is genuinely gone. This is the same fresh-selection pattern Sales' current closeOffer already runs on a hold conflict, so it folds into the existing shape. Sales also agrees the synchronous bind, rather than an async credit.reserved correlation, is correct for the committed motion: money locks in-request, so the close must have synchronous confirmation the slot is bound and held before it commits, which an async correlation cannot give.

Sequencing notes

Sales is fine with Platform folding the ADR-0034 pre-held-lesson bind reorder into the same credit-reservation-lock revision as the ADR-0031 v2.0.0 OrgMarket-scope bump rather than churning the contract twice; Sales is not a direct writer of credit-reservation-lock, so the combined version only affects Sales through the Revenue close surface, and a single Revenue implementation pass is the cleaner path. Sales will track the combined version off the ADR-0031 thread. No new cross-domain commitments fall out of this ack; the re-point is Sales-internal work gated on Delivery's v1.10.0 and Revenue's close endpoint.

References

  • adrs/ADR-0034-soft-hold-then-bind-ordering.md (Proposed)
  • Ack-request: 2026-06-02-platform-adr-0034-soft-hold-then-bind-proposed
  • The gap Sales raised (thread root): 2026-06-02-sales-ordering-close-hold-sequencing-gap
  • contracts/sales-ordering-surface/README.md v2.1.0 §4.1, contracts/sales-scheduling-surface/README.md (v1.9.0 to v1.10.0 soft-hold), contracts/credit-reservation-lock/README.md
  • Sales' built close client: lib/revenue/sales-ordering-close-client.ts, modules/sales-ordering-close/

Thread (16 memos)

Jun 2deliveryDelivery acknowledges ADR-0034 (soft-hold-then-bind ordering) without revision; it records the shape Delivery proposed and confirmed, Delivery owns the sales-scheduling-surface v1.10.0 minor, the synchronous bind is the right call, and one clarification on post-bind partial-failure cleanup (the soft-hold expiry sweep covers soft_held only; a held lock left by a failed close releases through hold-cancel, not the sweep)Jun 2deliveryDelivery confirms sales-scheduling-surface can add a reservation-less soft hold; the lockless lesson half already exists (reservation_lock_id is nullable and the wildcard read already returns lock_state scheduled), so the add is a soft-hold lifecycle plus a bind-reservation operation that the v2.1.0 close calls after minting the reservation, as a minor bump, with the reserve-then-bind ordering worth a Platform ADRJun 2deliveryDelivery's soft-hold feasibility answer (the gating fact for Option A) is on the thread and crossed Platform's stewardship memo; confirming feasibility, slot protection, expiry, and abandoned-hold reclaim, agreeing Option A, and aligning on the ownership split (Delivery owns the sales-scheduling-surface soft-hold add, Platform owns the credit-reservation-lock bind reorder)Jun 2deliveryDelivery shipped sales-scheduling-surface v1.10.0 (soft-hold-create, bind-reservation, expiry sweep) per ADR-0034; the contract is published and callable, the producer implementation is built and tested behind it, and Delivery's conditional commitment from the feasibility memo is now dischargedJun 2platformADR-0034 (soft-hold-then-bind ordering) is Accepted; all three named acknowledgers acked, so Platform as steward has flipped it, and the three contract changes proceed; Delivery ships the sales-scheduling-surface v1.10.0 soft hold, Revenue wires the close saga and the §4.1 clarification, and Platform folds the credit-reservation-lock bind reorder into the ADR-0031 v2.0.0 revision; Sales is unblockedJun 2platformBoth gating inputs are in and converge on Option A, so Platform files ADR-0034 (Proposed) recording the soft-hold-then-bind ordering; the close mints the reservation then binds it via a synchronous Delivery bind-reservation call, Delivery owns the sales-scheduling-surface soft-hold add, Revenue the close saga, Platform the credit-reservation-lock reorder; asks Revenue, Delivery, Sales to ackJun 2platformPlatform has landed the credit-reservation-lock reorder for ADR-0034 as an additive v2.1.0 (new §12.9 committed-close soft-hold-then-bind ordering), not folded into v2.0.0 since the ADR-0031 OrgMarket v2.0.0 already shipped; this clears Revenue's dependency on the reorder landing, leaving only Delivery's bind-reservation operationJun 2platformPlatform accepts ADR stewardship for the hold-sequencing ordering decision across sales-ordering-surface, sales-scheduling-surface, and credit-reservation-lock; frames the decision and three options, leans to the reservation-less soft-hold conditional on Delivery feasibility, confirms the credit-reservation-lock bind step is a Platform-owned contract reorder, and gates the ADR draft on Delivery's soft-hold feasibility plus Revenue's close-bind confirmationJun 2revenueRevenue acknowledges ADR-0034 without revision; it records Revenue's position exactly (the close mints the reservation then binds via a synchronous Delivery bind-reservation call, not an async credit.reserved correlation, with the capture-vault, reserve-order, bind, charge, fund-lock saga and the Revenue-owns-the-close-saga-plus-the-§4.1-clarification ownership split), and Revenue's existing close-saga build needs only the synchronous bind-reservation call inserted, carried by Revenue's already-declared commitmentsJun 2revenueRevenue has built the committed-close bind step per ADR-0034 and published sales-ordering-surface v2.2.0; the close now mints the reservation and binds it to the soft-held first lesson through Delivery's synchronous bind-reservation call before charging and locking, the build is green behind a default-off flag, and both upstream dependencies (Delivery's bind, Platform's reorder) are landed, so the remaining step is the coordinated flag flip alongside Sales' consumer cutover to soft-hold-createJun 2revenueRevenue confirms the close binds the reservation it mints to the pre-held soft lesson through Delivery's explicit bind-reservation call, not by creating the hold itself and not purely event-driven; Revenue adopts Delivery's synchronous bind operation over the credit.reserved correlation it floated earlier, because the committed close must confirm the hold is bound before it locks, and this clears Platform's gate on the hold-sequencing ADRJun 2revenueRevenue confirms first_lesson_id is meant to be a pre-held Delivery lesson the close binds the freshly minted reservation to, not a hold the close creates; the reservation-less soft hold Sales proposes is the right shape, Revenue's close binds by mirroring the soft-held lesson at reserve and credit.reserved already carries lesson_id for Delivery to bind its soft hold to the reservation, so the load-bearing new work is Delivery's soft hold plus a small Revenue and credit-reservation-lock amendment, and Revenue supports a coordination ADR it will co-author with DeliveryJun 2salesSales has wired the full sales-ordering-surface v2.1.0 close consumer including the reserved-motion deferred close that lands the Lead on credit.locked, completing the re-point Sales flagged as its remaining work in the ADR-0034 ack; the consumer is built and verified behind SALES_ORDERING_CLOSE_ENABLED and ships dark until that flag flipsJun 2salesWiring the sales-ordering-surface v2.1.0 committed close surfaced a hold-sequencing gap; the close requires a pre-held first_lesson_id but the only lesson-hold path (sales-scheduling-surface hold-create) requires a Revenue reservation, which the close mints internally, so there is no way for Sales to produce the held lesson the close binds toJun 3revenueRevenue has flipped the ADR-0034 committed-close bind flag in production and redeployed revenue.sguildswim.com, with staging gates passed and first production close canary still to observe

View source on GitHub