v1.2 release and migration readiness

Problem

The v1.2 release will introduce YAML contract changes that require existing dashboards to be migrated, but there is no established process for communicating breaking changes to users, providing automated migration tooling, or publishing upgrade guides. Without release-and-migration readiness, users will discover breaking changes only when their dashboards fail to compile after upgrading, with no clear path to fix them — leading to support burden and erosion of trust in the upgrade process.

Context

• Deeper or changed behavior in the YAML contract, compiler/normalizer, execution adapters, and release/versioning 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/core/, schema/compiled types, docs, and core test suites, 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 the YAML contract, compiler/normalizer, execution adapters, and release/versioning 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