wehub-resource-sync
98e40dac97
CLI Smoke Test / smoke-test-linux (20) (push) Has been cancelled
CLI Smoke Test / smoke-test-linux (24) (push) Has been cancelled
CLI Smoke Test / smoke-test-windows (20) (push) Has been cancelled
CLI Smoke Test / smoke-test-windows (24) (push) Has been cancelled
Expo App TypeScript typecheck / typecheck (push) Has been cancelled
87 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
87 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
# Competition Research
|
|
|
|
Use this folder for distilled competitor research that is worth keeping in the
|
|
Happy repo.
|
|
|
|
## What belongs here
|
|
|
|
- markdown notes about how another product works
|
|
- protocol writeups, message samples, and sequence diagrams
|
|
- screenshots and small sanitized artifacts that explain behavior
|
|
- links to upstream docs, repos, commits, issues, and blog posts
|
|
- comparisons back to Happy when the finding affects product or protocol design
|
|
|
|
## What does not belong here
|
|
|
|
- git checkouts of competitor repos
|
|
- git submodules
|
|
- copied source trees or vendored code dumps
|
|
- large raw logs, binaries, or secrets
|
|
|
|
If you need a checkout for research, keep it outside this repository. Prefer the
|
|
existing adjacent area under `../happy-adjacent/research/{vendor}` when it
|
|
exists; otherwise use another machine-local path that is not committed.
|
|
|
|
## Recommended layout
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
docs/competition/
|
|
├── AGENTS.md
|
|
├── comparison-matrix.md # cross-vendor summary by topic
|
|
├── claude/
|
|
│ ├── README.md # high-level overview and key takeaways
|
|
│ ├── sources.md # upstream URLs, commit hashes, dates reviewed
|
|
│ ├── message-protocol.md # envelopes, streaming events, turn boundaries
|
|
│ ├── session-lifecycle.md # startup, resume, interruption, teardown
|
|
│ └── artifacts/ # screenshots, tiny trace snippets, diagrams
|
|
├── codex/
|
|
│ └── ...
|
|
└── opencode/
|
|
└── ...
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Per-vendor file expectations
|
|
|
|
Each vendor folder should start small and stay focused:
|
|
|
|
- `README.md`: what this product is, what was inspected, and the main findings
|
|
- `sources.md`: repo URL, docs links, commit/tag reviewed, and review date
|
|
- topic files such as `message-protocol.md`, `tool-calling.md`,
|
|
`subagents.md`, `task-tracking.md`, `modes-and-permissions.md`, or
|
|
`sandbox.md` when those topics matter
|
|
- `artifacts/`: only small evidence files that help explain the writeup
|
|
|
|
Do not mirror the competitor's repo layout here. Write the conclusions we want
|
|
to keep.
|
|
|
|
## Research workflow
|
|
|
|
1. Inspect the competitor from a local checkout, docs site, product behavior, or
|
|
captured traces.
|
|
2. Record the exact upstream references in `sources.md`.
|
|
3. Write the distilled result in the vendor folder.
|
|
4. Extract reusable comparisons into `comparison-matrix.md` when multiple
|
|
vendors cover the same topic.
|
|
|
|
## Current priorities
|
|
|
|
Start with the protocol and control surfaces that matter most for Happy:
|
|
|
|
- message protocol and event envelopes
|
|
- tool call representation and streaming
|
|
- subagents / task delegation model
|
|
- task tracking / todo surfaces
|
|
- mode switching and model switching
|
|
- permission / approval flow
|
|
- sandbox / workspace isolation
|
|
- session resume, fork, and interrupt behavior
|
|
- remote sync / server architecture
|
|
|
|
Current product note: OpenCode is a particularly strong reference right now.
|
|
Its desktop UI, feature set, and especially the clickable context/debug surface
|
|
look worth studying closely. Treat its messaging protocol as a leading design
|
|
input, and dig further into how it syncs state with its server.
|
|
|
|
The rule of thumb is simple: checkouts stay outside the repo; insights and small
|
|
supporting artifacts go here.
|