Policy Changesets
Every policy edit took effect the moment it was made. Mark wanted to edit freely across pages, then deploy, discard or send for approval as one unit.
The full proposal was overtaken within hours. Its core idea, making a change separate from publishing it, became the one shared draft we built two cycles later.
Documents
With file names, on their own page →Start here
What changed
The two changes that matter most, in plain words. Open any one to see it.
- 1
Making a policy change is now separate from making it live: changes wait, then go out together.
Change first, publish later · came from Mark Peterson, Tyler Flint and others
- 2
Before publishing, you see one summary of every change, and a setting toggled back and forth drops out.
A summary before anything goes live · came from Mark Parson
- Personal drafts, approvals and two-part version numbers were dropped; versions are plain numbers. In words
How we got here
Each change, traced back to the conversation it came from. A solid mark means the record names the source; a dashed one was matched by the draft and waits for review.
“I do think we could get away with just a single draft... that could be the first cut, and it's the simplest.”
market-analyst /calls/5c8785e2… (local)“If we could address the complexity at first... I have no problem doing that if... it doesn't distract anyone.”
market-analyst /calls/5c8785e2… (local)c116-D1 Personal, named changesets, with conflicts found at deploy. Overtaken the same day by one shared draft. — Mark Parson
c116-D3 Approval as a per-company setting by risk. Dropped for v1: no approvers at first. — Mark Parson
Making a policy change is now separate from making it live: changes wait, then go out together.
“We don't wanna be, like, deploying that. Those those two changes live. We sort of wanna, like, stage them.”
market-analyst /calls/04e3d850… (local)c116-D6 One company-wide version per publish, with a review page first. — Mark Parson
Before publishing, you see one summary of every change, and a setting toggled back and forth drops out.
Thanks to
People outside Qpoint first. Every thank-you points at something they said or made.
"We could get away with just a single draft"
Wanted changes staged and versioned rather than live toggles (Oct 14), then argued the first version needs only one shared draft, with more only when customers show the need (Oct 21).
“I do think we could get away with just a single draft... that could be the first cut, and it's the simplest.” first-hand
Named changesets "the hardest thing"
Called concurrent changeset conflicts the hardest problem on the roadmap, which is why v1 skipped them.
“Of all the things that we're doing, this is the hardest, like, without question.” internal
Proposed starting with one draft at a time
Suggested a single active draft or a global lock for the first cut, keeping full conflict handling for later.
Asked for the candidate config
Brought the firewall admin's "candidate config versus running config" and ruled the proposal's decisions that morning.
All images
Every picture from this cycle. Click any one to step through them all.
The pairs
Everything captured · 0
The full record 4 decisions · 2 key-change entries · 783 words · 0 captures
The record stays as written, for agents and for audit: Key Changes, every decision, the artifacts and the visual record.
Open the record for c116 →