dannystocker/navidocs
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions
navidocs/ANALYSIS_INDEX.md
ggq-admin eaf9fae275 docs: Add complete NaviDocs handover documentation and StackCP analysis 
This commit finalizes the NaviDocs MVP documentation with comprehensive handover materials.

## Documentation Added:

1. **NAVIDOCS_HANDOVER.md** - Complete project handover (65% MVP complete)
   - Executive summary and current status
   - Repository structure and component details
   - Testing results and known issues
   - Deployment options (StackCP vs VPS)
   - Next steps and risk assessment
   - Success metrics and recommendations

2. **StackCP Analysis Documents**:
   - ANALYSIS_INDEX.md - Master overview
   - STACKCP_ARCHITECTURE_ANALYSIS.md - Technical deep-dive
   - STACKCP_DEBATE_BRIEF.md - Deployment decision framework
   - STACKCP_QUICK_REFERENCE.md - Fast decision-making tool

## Current State Summary:

**Completed** (65% MVP):
- ✅ Database schema (13 tables, fully normalized)
- ✅ OCR pipeline (3 options: Tesseract 85%, Google Drive, Google Vision)
- ✅ Upload endpoint with background processing
- ✅ StackCP deployment fully evaluated
- ✅ Local development environment operational

**Pending** (35% to MVP):
- ⚠️ Meilisearch authentication (15-min fix)
- ⚠️ Frontend UI incomplete (1-2 days)
- ⚠️ Authentication not implemented (1 day)
- ⚠️ Tests needed (2-3 days)

## Deployment Options:

**StackCP Shared Hosting**: /bin/bash infrastructure, suitable for <5K docs/month
**VPS Alternative**: /month, better for scale

## Key Findings:

- Upload + OCR pipeline: ✅ Working (85% confidence)
- Database: 184KB with test data
- Services: Redis ✅, Meilisearch ⚠️ (auth issue), API ✅, Worker ✅
- Git: 18 commits, all code committed

Ready for: Development continuation, deployment preparation
Not ready for: Production (needs auth + testing)

🚀 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-10-19 13:19:42 +02:00

9.3 KiB
Raw Export PDF Permalink Blame History

StackCP Architecture Analysis - Document Index

Analysis Date: 2025-10-19 Tech Lead: Autonomous Development Prompt Evaluation Target: StackCP (20i) Shared Hosting Deployment Status: Ready for technical debate

Document Overview

This analysis evaluates the FastFile/NaviDocs autonomous development prompt and deployment strategy against the discovered StackCP constraints. Three comprehensive documents have been prepared for the technical debate.

Document 1: Comprehensive Analysis

File: /home/setup/navidocs/STACKCP_ARCHITECTURE_ANALYSIS.md

Purpose: Deep technical analysis of architectural impacts

Contents:

  1. Executive Summary
  2. Critical Issues (Blockers)
    • Repository structure assumptions
    • Native module compilation
    • Process management
    • File persistence
    • Development workflow
  3. Major Revisions Needed
    • Mission statement
    • Technology stack
    • Deployment strategy
    • Development workflow
    • Backup/recovery
  4. Minor Tweaks (sections that mostly work)
  5. Proposed Repository Structure
  6. Revised Deployment Steps
  7. Path Configuration Strategy
  8. Operational Concerns
  9. Testing Strategy
  10. Implementation Priority
  11. Risks and Mitigations

Audience: Technical implementers, architects Reading Time: 30-40 minutes Use Case: Detailed implementation planning

Document 2: Debate Brief

File: /home/setup/navidocs/STACKCP_DEBATE_BRIEF.md

Purpose: Structure the technical debate with Security and OCI experts

Contents:

  1. The Situation (constraints summary)
  2. Architectural Impact (code, ops, docs changes)
  3. Key Questions for Each Expert
    • Security Expert: Risk assessment, external services, code integrity
    • OCI Architect: Container alternatives, portability, operational complexity
    • Tech Lead: Developer experience, testing, rollout plan
  4. Three Paths Forward
    • Path A: Full StackCP adaptation (5-7 days)
    • Path B: Hybrid approach (3-4 days)
    • Path C: Abandon StackCP, use VPS (1 day)
  5. Cost Comparison (detailed analysis)
  6. Security Risk Matrix
  7. Technical Debt Analysis
  8. Recommendations
  9. Decision Framework
  10. Proposed Action Items

Audience: Decision-makers, security experts, architects Reading Time: 20-30 minutes Use Case: Facilitate structured debate and decision

Document 3: Quick Reference Card

File: /home/setup/navidocs/STACKCP_QUICK_REFERENCE.md

Purpose: Fast decision-making during debate

Contents:

  1. Core Problem (visual diagram)
  2. Three Paths Decision Matrix
  3. Critical Architectural Changes (code examples)
  4. Security Risk Assessment (tables)
  5. Cost Analysis (real numbers)
  6. Decision Tree (flowchart)
  7. Key Questions (< 5 min to answer)
  8. Recommendation Algorithm
  9. What Changes in Each Path (checklist)
  10. Immediate Actions (next 60 minutes)
  11. Red Flags (abort criteria)
  12. Final Recommendation
  13. Debate Checklist

Audience: All stakeholders during live debate Reading Time: 5-10 minutes Use Case: Quick reference, decision checklist

Supporting Documents (Already Exist)

StackCP Evaluation Reports

  • /home/setup/navidocs/STACKCP_EVALUATION_REPORT.md - Initial evaluation (445 lines)
  • /home/setup/navidocs/STACKCP_VERIFICATION_SUMMARY.md - Test results (433 lines)
  • /home/setup/navidocs/docs/DEPLOYMENT_STACKCP.md - Original deployment guide (375 lines)
  • /home/setup/navidocs/docs/STACKCP_QUICKSTART.md - Quick start guide (301 lines)

NaviDocs Core Documentation

  • /home/setup/navidocs/README.md - Project overview
  • /home/setup/navidocs/ARCHITECTURE-SUMMARY.md - Architecture decisions
  • /home/setup/navidocs/docs/roadmap/v1.0-mvp.md - MVP roadmap
  • /home/setup/navidocs/docs/roadmap/2-week-launch-plan.md - Launch plan

Key Findings Summary

Critical Discovery

Only /tmp has executable permissions on StackCP shared hosting

  • Home directory is noexec (cannot run binaries or compile native modules)
  • Application code MUST be in /tmp/navidocs/
  • Data (database, uploads) MUST be in ~/navidocs/
  • This fundamentally breaks standard deployment assumptions

Architectural Blockers

  1. Repository structure: Assumes single location for code + data
  2. Native modules: Cannot compile in home directory
  3. Process management: PM2/systemd assumptions may not work
  4. File persistence: /tmp may be cleared on reboot
  5. Development workflow: npm must be executed via wrapper

Required Changes

  1. Code (2-3 days): Path configuration, environment detection
  2. Operations (1-2 days): Checkpoint scripts, health checks, backups
  3. Documentation (1-2 days): Rewrite deployment guides
  4. Testing (1 day): StackCP-specific scenarios

Total: 5-7 days for full StackCP adaptation

Alternatives

  1. VPS Deployment (1 day): Standard environment, $5-6/month
  2. Container Platform (1 day): Modern deployment, $5-10/month
  3. Hybrid Approach (3-4 days): Support both StackCP and standard

Cost-Benefit Analysis

StackCP Adaptation

  • Time: 5-7 days development
  • Cost: $0 new (using existing hosting)
  • Operational overhead: Ongoing custom scripts
  • Technical debt: Medium-High (StackCP-specific code)
  • Security risk: Medium (code exposure in /tmp)

VPS Alternative

  • Time: 1 day development
  • Cost: $6/month ($72/year)
  • Operational overhead: Standard (PM2, systemd)
  • Technical debt: Low (industry standard)
  • Security risk: Low (standard practices)

Savings with VPS: $2,400-4,100 in Year 1 (considering developer time)

Recommended Decision Path

Step 1: Answer Key Questions (5 minutes)

Use /home/setup/navidocs/STACKCP_QUICK_REFERENCE.md section "Key Questions"

Step 2: Evaluate Risks (10 minutes)

Review security and operational risks in Debate Brief

Step 3: Choose Path (5 minutes)

  • Path A: Full StackCP (only if hard requirement + acceptable risks)
  • Path B: Hybrid (if learning value + time available)
  • Path C: VPS (default recommendation)

Step 4: Implement (1-7 days)

Follow implementation plan in chosen path

For Immediate Use

Starting the Debate

  1. Open: STACKCP_QUICK_REFERENCE.md (shared screen)
  2. Reference: STACKCP_DEBATE_BRIEF.md (for detailed questions)
  3. Backup: STACKCP_ARCHITECTURE_ANALYSIS.md (for technical details)

Decision Checklist

  • Why StackCP? (cost, existing account, learning)
  • Security acceptable? (code exposure, external services)
  • Timeline? (1 day VPS vs 5-7 days StackCP)
  • Long-term vision? (personal, startup, enterprise)
  • Maintenance capacity? (solo, team, DevOps)

After Decision

  • Document chosen path in project README
  • Update ARCHITECTURE-SUMMARY.md with constraints
  • Create implementation task list
  • Assign owner for implementation
  • Set review milestones

File Locations Summary

/home/setup/navidocs/
├── STACKCP_ARCHITECTURE_ANALYSIS.md   ← Full technical analysis (this evaluation)
├── STACKCP_DEBATE_BRIEF.md            ← Structured debate guide
├── STACKCP_QUICK_REFERENCE.md         ← Quick decision reference
├── ANALYSIS_INDEX.md                  ← This file (overview)
├── STACKCP_EVALUATION_REPORT.md       ← Initial evaluation (existing)
├── STACKCP_VERIFICATION_SUMMARY.md    ← Test results (existing)
├── README.md                          ← Project overview
├── ARCHITECTURE-SUMMARY.md            ← Architecture decisions
└── docs/
    ├── DEPLOYMENT_STACKCP.md          ← Original deployment guide (needs revision)
    ├── STACKCP_QUICKSTART.md          ← Quick start (needs revision)
    └── roadmap/
        ├── v1.0-mvp.md                ← MVP roadmap (needs revision)
        └── 2-week-launch-plan.md      ← Launch plan (needs revision)

Next Actions

Before Debate

  • Review all three analysis documents
  • Prepare answers to "Key Questions" in Quick Reference
  • Gather stakeholders (Security, OCI, Tech Lead)
  • Allocate 30-60 minutes for debate

During Debate

  • Present findings (10 min)
  • Security expert review (10 min)
  • OCI architect review (10 min)
  • Cost-benefit discussion (10 min)
  • Decision vote (5 min)
  • Action item assignment (5 min)

After Debate

  • Document decision in project docs
  • Create implementation task list
  • Update autonomous development prompt (if needed)
  • Revise Mission statement (if StackCP chosen)
  • Begin implementation

Contact Information

Analysis Prepared By: Tech Lead (Claude Code) Date: 2025-10-19 Review Status: Awaiting technical debate Decision Deadline: Before Phase 1 implementation

Summary

This analysis provides three comprehensive documents for evaluating NaviDocs deployment on StackCP:

  1. STACKCP_ARCHITECTURE_ANALYSIS.md: Complete technical breakdown
  2. STACKCP_DEBATE_BRIEF.md: Structured debate guide
  3. STACKCP_QUICK_REFERENCE.md: Fast decision-making tool

Recommendation: Path C (VPS) for production, Path B (Hybrid) if StackCP required

Estimated Savings: $2,400-4,100 Year 1 by choosing VPS over StackCP

Key Risk: Code exposure in /tmp on StackCP shared hosting

Timeline: 1 day (VPS) vs 5-7 days (StackCP adaptation)

Ready for debate and decision.