Release Evidence Index¶
← Previous
Release Candidate Summary
Current
Release Evidence Index
Next →
Defect and Risk Assessment
Example purpose¶
This artifact indexes the evidence used for the ES-110 release-readiness decision.
The index shows what evidence supports internal review, what evidence blocks operational pilot, and what must be carried into Operations, Deployment, Monitoring, Stewardship, and Governance.
Project¶
LMU Campus Operations and Incident Coordination Platform
Document control¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Artifact owner | COICP Product Engineer |
| Primary reviewers | Architecture Review Board chair, IT security reviewer, AI reviewer, Compliance reviewer, Campus Safety liaison |
| Status | Accepted with evidence gaps |
| Last updated | 2026-07-06 |
| Related Engineering Stage | ES-110 — Release Readiness |
| Project workspace target | docs/project-workspace/release/release_evidence_index.md |
Candidate context¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Candidate | LMU-COICP-RC-001 |
| Planned deployment ID | DEP-LMU-COICP-2026-03-18-001 |
| Planned review environment | LMU-COICP Internal Engineering Review Environment |
| Planned dataset | Spring Semester Synthetic Incident Dataset |
| Planned synthetic records | 421 |
| Planned reviewer accounts | 24 |
| Planned review window | March 18–22, 2026 |
| AI Incident Summary | Disabled |
| Operational pilot | Not approved |
Evidence index¶
| Evidence Area | Artifact | LMU Purpose | Release Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Requirements | docs/project-workspace/requirements/requirements_readiness_summary.md |
Defines LMU stakeholder, incident intake, evidence, access, AI, and emergency-boundary requirements. | Complete |
| Planning | docs/project-workspace/planning/planning_readiness_summary.md |
Defines work, dependencies, owners, and risks. | Complete |
| Architecture | docs/project-workspace/architecture/architecture_readiness_summary.md |
Defines COICP components, evidence flow, and boundaries. | Complete |
| Design | docs/project-workspace/design/design_readiness_summary.md |
Defines workflows, data model, handoff behavior, and errors. | Complete |
| Implementation | docs/project-workspace/implementation/implementation_summary.md |
Summarizes implemented work, AI-assisted engineering use, and gaps. | Complete with partial items |
| Integration | docs/project-workspace/integration/integration_readiness_summary.md |
Summarizes integrated baseline and risks. | Complete with follow-up |
| Testing | docs/project-workspace/testing/testing_readiness_summary.md |
Summarizes verification results. | Complete with defects |
| Defects | docs/project-workspace/testing/defect_log.md |
Lists release-impacting defects DEF-001 through DEF-005. | Complete with open defects |
| Guardrails | docs/project-workspace/testing/guardrail_verification.md |
Shows evidence, access, AI, scope, retention, and direct-update verification. | Partial |
| AI | docs/project-workspace/testing/ai_verification_record.md |
Confirms AI Incident Summary remains disabled/deferred. | Complete for disabled AI |
| Release scope | docs/project-workspace/release/release_scope.md |
Defines internal-review-only release boundary. | Complete |
| Release decision | docs/project-workspace/release/release_decision_record.md |
Records release decision and authority. | Complete |
Evidence strengths¶
- Requirements, planning, architecture, and design are coherent with the LMU project story.
- Implementation and integration evidence identify partial and deferred work.
- Testing evidence captures both passing normal paths and open release blockers.
- Guardrail evidence identifies normal-path support and failure-path gaps.
- AI evidence confirms AI Incident Summary is disabled.
- Release scope can be limited to LMU internal review.
- Evidence is strong enough to avoid a full release deferral.
Evidence gaps¶
| Gap | Release Impact | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| Full access-control matrix testing incomplete | Blocks real-user pilot | IT security reviewer |
| Evidence write failure behavior not verified | Blocks operational pilot | Architecture Review Board chair |
| Invalid status transition rejection has open defect | Blocks operational workflow pilot | Product Engineer |
| Emergency-boundary test not fully formalized | Blocks pilot | Product Engineer / Campus Safety liaison |
| Build/test command evidence incomplete | Weakens repeatability | Product Engineer |
| Final retention policy unresolved | Blocks production/sensitive data | Compliance reviewer |
| Post-incident review export deferred | Excluded from release | Product Owner |
| AI Incident Summary workflow deferred | Excluded from release | AI reviewer |
Evidence interpretation¶
The evidence supports:
LMU internal engineering review only.
The evidence does not support:
- operational pilot;
- real campus incident use;
- production or sensitive data;
- AI Incident Summary release;
- broad stakeholder deployment.
Evidence decision¶
The evidence index is sufficient for ES-110 decision-making because it identifies both supporting evidence and release-blocking gaps.