Mandate CIQ build/test pipeline converge with the RESFs — one unified project, Nathan accountable, coordination over speed

Situation

Peter laid down a mandate that CIQs Linux build/test pipeline will become functionally identical to the RESFs over time — a single consolidated project rather than parallel tooling. Nathan drives and is held accountable for closing the CIQ-to-RESF gaps (hardware parity, cut over to Koji, mirrored build infrastructure, a full validation framework that runs PR-specific tests). Justins build world must sign on and use it everywhere. Ryans gauntlet/outfitter tooling and Leighs RESF-side work are welcome only if they plug into the one project rather than forking. Peter explicitly chose coordination over speed even though it slows Ryans faster build-it-now instinct.

Reasoning

Confirmed by Peter. The core driver is a healthy upstream: if CIQs pipeline mirrors Rockys, CIQ can patch zero-day CVEs for Rocky the same day, protecting both RESF health and CIQs commercial CVE-response promise. Letting two pipelines grow in parallel would defeat convergence, so accountability goes to Nathan (whose world it must serve), not the faster-moving party. Coordination-over-speed is an org-design choice — the value only materializes if Nathans and Justins worlds actually adopt and use the platform everywhere, which requires their ownership.

Additional Context

Originated at the 6/3 in-person engineering F2F (not Fathom-captured) and formalized across the 6/4 Greg/Ryan/Leigh group DM and the 6/5 Ryan 1:1. Triggered by the flood of incoming zero-day CVEs. Builds on prior decisions: Engineering owns all QA (Nathan accountable, 5/21) and Prioritize build/test infrastructure to eliminate reactive interrupts (5/8).

Observed Evidence

Slack group DM 6/4: one project here, Nathan accountable for closing CIQ/RESF gaps, mirror Rocky build infra, same-day Rocky CVE patches. Ryan 1:1 6/5: laid down a mandate pipeline = RESFs; valuing coordination over speed; needs a consolidated plan for what gets built, test frameworks, Linux-kernel QBR acceptance criteria.

Confidence Breakdown

Reasoning Depth Analysis