Adr 011 conflict resolution
ADR-011: Conflict resolution protocol
Section titled “ADR-011: Conflict resolution protocol”Status: proposed Date: 2026-05-19
Context
Section titled “Context”Multiple concurrent contributors — human or AI — will propose incompatible approaches, create merge conflicts, and disagree on design. Without a defined escalation path, work stalls or the loudest voice wins.
Decision
Section titled “Decision”Escalation ladder
Section titled “Escalation ladder”Level 1: Contributor discussion (PR comments, issue thread) ↓ (no resolution within 2 interactions)Level 2: Request additional reviewer (fresh perspective) ↓ (still no resolution)Level 3: Competing proposals in the issue body (explicit trade-off comparison) ↓ (still no resolution)Level 4: Admin decision (binding, documented in issue body)Decision criteria
Section titled “Decision criteria”When comparing approaches, evaluate on:
- Correctness — does it solve the stated problem?
- Simplicity — fewer moving parts wins when correctness is equal
- Consistency — follows existing codebase patterns?
- Reversibility — can we change our mind later?
- Blast radius — what breaks if this is wrong?
Merge conflict ownership
Section titled “Merge conflict ownership”| Situation | Who resolves |
|---|---|
| Two PRs modify same file, one merged first | Second PR’s author rebases |
| Stacked PR conflict from lower change | Lower PR author notifies; upper PRs rebase after stable |
| Concurrent agents modified same module | First to merge wins; second adapts |
| Architectural conflict (both valid) | Escalate to Level 3 |
Human vs. agent disagreement
Section titled “Human vs. agent disagreement”- Agents present evidence (code, tests, measurements) not authority
- Humans can override but must document why
- Agents do not repeatedly argue a rejected point
- If an agent believes a human decision causes harm (security, data loss), it escalates to admin
Consequences
Section titled “Consequences”- (+) Disagreements have a defined path to resolution
- (+) Merge conflicts have clear ownership
- (+) Competing approaches are compared on criteria, not authority
- (+) Admin decision is the final backstop (no infinite loops)
- (-) Escalation takes time; may slow delivery
- (-) Level 3 (written trade-off) requires effort
- (!) Must not become a veto mechanism for slow contributors
References
Section titled “References”- Issue #142 — full RFC with open questions
- ADR-003 — governance (issue body as resolution record)
- ADR-005 — feedback loop (reviewer disagreements feed into this)
- ADR-009 — security (authority levels for decisions)