# Delivery Planning — Risk & Sequencing Rationale

> The why behind the Bolt order. **Bolt** is one build pass over a piece of the
> work, ending in something that runs. The economic order chosen here is: value
> core first, then the higher-unknown parallel pair, then integration.

## Sequencing argument

The chosen order balances **early working software** (Q1=A) with **de-risking the
uncertain parts early** (Q6=B,C,D — the user's worries: funnies unpredictability,
AI drafting quality, review-handoff reliability).

- **Bolt 1 — `generator` core first (value/skeleton case).** Builds the central,
  highest-confidence capability: CLI → content → layout → emit → A4 print. The
  paper works end-to-end with hand-written content early, so the highest-value
  surface (the printable broadsheet) is proven before the exotic parts land.
  This also naturally satisfies the affirmed "no separate walking skeleton": the
  first Bolt IS a thin end-to-end slice (markdown in → A4 page out) without
  calling it one.
- **Bolts 2a/2b — `ai-draft` and `funnies` in parallel (risk-reduction).** The
  two most unpredictable units — AI copy quality and content-derived puzzle/
  cartoon generation — are independent, so they build concurrently (Q4=B). Both
  de-risk the user's stated worries (Q6=B,C) before integration. Each is also
  independently testable (DraftBundle contract; puzzle+cartoon output).
- **Bolt 3 — integration last.** Wires the two new units into the core and
  completes the full-chain fidelity (multi-page print, photo embed, per-article
  review handoff). The review-handoff reliability worry (Q6=D) is addressed here
  against the file:// no-server constraint.

## Reference heuristic

No formal WSJF score (Q2=A). The order follows a pragmatic mix:
**value-first + risk-reduction + dependency-aware**. It is coherent with
Reinertsen's CD3-style reasoning (deliver value early while sequencing the high
uncertainty soon enough to learn from it), but we did not compute a numeric score.

## Deviation-from-topology note

The Bolt order **does not strictly follow 2.7's topological order**. Topology
says `generator` depends on `ai-draft` and `funnies`; a strict topological walk
would build ai-draft + funnies first. We deviate deliberately: **Bolt 1 builds
`generator` with simple/sample content first** (no ai-draft/funnies needed for
the core hand-written path), then the independent pair in parallel (Bolt 2a/2b),
then integration (Bolt 3). This is justified by Q1=A (value core early) and the
parallelism in Q4=B. The deviation is captured here as the stage requires.

## Rationale

| Bolt | Rationale |
|---|---|
| Bolt 1 | Value core, highest confidence, end-to-end early |
| Bolt 2a | Independent + user worry (AI quality/drafting) — de-risk |
| Bolt 2b | Independent + user worry (funnies) — de-risk |
| Bolt 3 | Integration + full fidelity (incl. print-fidelity worry Q6=A) |