v1.2 release and migration readiness

Problem

The v1.2 release will introduce schema changes, new enrichment layers, and potentially breaking updates to the context contract. Users and integrations built against v1.0 need a clear migration path — without upgrade guidance, breaking change communication, and compatibility tooling, the release will either break existing consumers silently or force the team to maintain indefinite backwards compatibility with the v1.0 contract, constraining future evolution.

Context

• Deeper or changed behavior in context schema/catalog contracts and Nimble enrichment flows across product surfaces often creates migration work for users, operators, or downstream systems, and that work is easy to underestimate until release time.
• This task should make the release path explicit: what is changing, who is affected, what needs communication or tooling help, and how rollback would work if adoption goes sideways.
• Expected touchpoints include dataface/ai/, context-contract docs, eval wiring, and inspect-derived artifacts, release notes, migration docs, compatibility checks, and any support/runbook surfaces that will absorb the change.

Possible Solutions

• A - Treat release readiness as a final checklist after implementation: simple, but it often surfaces migration risk too late to respond well.
• B - Recommended: plan release and migration alongside the feature depth work: document contract changes, compatibility handling, communication, and rollback before the release window.
• C - Force all users onto the new behavior with minimal migration help: faster to ship, but costly in trust and support load.

Plan

1. List the behavior, contract, or configuration changes in context schema/catalog contracts and Nimble enrichment flows across product surfaces that could affect users, operators, or downstream consumers.
2. Define the migration path, release notes, compatibility expectations, and any temporary bridges or tooling needed for safe adoption.
3. Confirm the rollback and support posture for the riskiest changes and make sure the release owner surfaces are documented.
4. Review the plan against the actual implementation scope and create follow-up items for anything that cannot safely make the release cut.

Implementation Progress

Review Feedback

• [ ] Review cleared