Softbinding Manifest Storage¶
Current State¶
The current docs do not describe a durable manifest-storage path for softbinding data. Internal implementation notes mention future store-oriented expansion in the infrastructure layer, but the checked-in public docs remain focused on request processing, output writing, and current runtime paths.
Planned Outcome¶
Document a database-backed softbinding manifest storage capability that explains how manifest data can be stored, retrieved, and connected to future softbinding workflows.
The intended outcome is a public explanation of durable storage behavior rather than a low-level schema document. Readers should be able to understand why manifest persistence exists, what operational problem it solves, and how it fits into the service model.
Why It Matters¶
Durable manifest storage would turn softbinding from a one-off processing action into a capability that can support later retrieval, operational tracking, and integration with surrounding systems. It also creates a clearer path for documenting future lookup and status workflows beyond immediate processing results.
What Needs To Be In Place¶
- a clear persistence model for softbinding manifest records
- documented boundaries between transient job state and durable manifest state
- retrieval and lookup behavior that fits the public service story
- operational guidance for running the storage layer in production environments
Open Questions¶
- What parts of manifest data should be durably stored versus derived on demand?
- How much of the storage model should appear in public API docs compared with operator-focused documentation?
- Should manifest storage be described first as a service capability, an integration surface, or an operational dependency?