# Reviewer meeting — agenda (for me)

> **Audience.** Myself, before the meeting. Not shared with the
> reviewer (they have [`briefing.md`](briefing.md) and
> [`questions.md`](questions.md) instead).
>
> **Purpose.** Keep the conversation on the high-stakes items
> without slipping into detail-tour mode.

**Length:** ~60 min (default; willing to extend if conversation is
productive).

## Opening — 5 min

- **Thank-you** + ~30 s on why I value their time specifically
  (active researcher in the exact line — decorated DCE, Penner
  coordinates, canonical tessellations, hyperideal polyhedra — that
  conformallab++ aspires to be infrastructure for; best-positioned
  audience for the material AND the most likely future power user).
- **Confirm format**: they've read `briefing.md`? Yes → skip ahead.
  No → take 3 min to walk through it together via the reviewer-hub
  URL.

## §1 Architectural tour — 10 min

Goal: they leave §1 with a mental map of what's where.

1. Open <https://tmoussa.codeberg.page/ConformalLabpp/>.
2. Click through:
   - Doxygen → `discrete_conformal_map_euclidean` (the canonical entry,
     shows the named-parameter pattern + traits).
   - `locked-vs-flexible.md` § Summary table.
   - `dependencies.md` § TL;DR.
3. **Don't** demo running the test suite live unless they ask —
   they can verify the green badges later.

**Cue to move on**: when they have no more "where is X?" questions.

## §2 The seven questions — 35 min

Goal: get clear answers to as many of the 7 questions in
[`questions.md`](questions.md) as possible.  Order is chosen so the
research-relevant questions come *first* (their answer has the largest
downstream effect on the roadmap):

1. **Q1 — research-track alignment** (which of 9d.2 / 9f / 10c / 10c′
   would unblock concrete experiments?).  ~8 min.  Most likely to
   make them feel the project is genuinely *for* their work, not just
   adjacent to it.
2. **Q2 — decorated-DCE API surface** (A/B/C named parameter vs new
   solver vs property-map auto-detect).  ~7 min.  Sets a concrete
   shape we can sketch in code right after the meeting.
3. **Q3 — Phase 9b-analytic** (Schläfli Hessian — implement now?).
   ~8 min.  May trigger longer math discussion; cap at 10 min and
   offer to continue async via the derivation note.
4. **Q5 — GC-1 cross-validation co-authorship**.  ~4 min.  Read the
   room: if they're warm, push; if cool, leave as "let me follow up
   in writing".
5. **Q4 — Phase 9c port-literal vs re-derive** (algorithm choice).
   ~4 min.  Less critical than Q1–Q3 because we have a viable default
   either way.
6. **Q6 — CGAL submission packaging** (one package vs several).
   ~4 min.  Project-management question; their answer is *advisory*
   even if it's confident.

**Trap to avoid**: don't relitigate any of the already-made decisions
(e.g. Surface_mesh as default, Eigen as backend) unless they bring it
up under "anything you'd say no to".  Move forward, not sideways.
Keep Q4/Q6 *short* — they are project management; Q1–Q3 are the
research-flavoured ones their time is best spent on.

## §3 Q7 — the "no" question — 5 min

[`questions.md`](questions.md) §Q7: *"Is there one architecture
decision where you think 'no, that's the wrong call'?"*

Ask explicitly. Wait.  Don't fill silence.  Negative feedback at this
phase is the highest-value information of the entire meeting.

## §4 Wrap-up — 5 min

- **Summarise**: 1 sentence per Q1–Q7 answer.
- **Next steps**: 
  - Items they offered to help on (if any) → I'll send a follow-up
    email within 48 h.
  - Items they flagged as worth changing → I'll write a one-page
    plan + send for sign-off before starting work.
- **Cadence**: do they want a periodic update? Once-a-quarter? When
  hitting Phase 9c milestone?
- **Citation**: ask whether they want acknowledgement in the
  CGAL submission's `THANKS.md`.

## Material I have ready (in tabs)

1. <https://tmoussa.codeberg.page/ConformalLabpp/>
2. <https://codeberg.org/TMoussa/ConformalLabpp> (source)
3. Local terminal in the repo (for any "show me X" requests)
4. `doc/math/hyperideal-hessian-derivation.md` open in editor
   (for Q2)
5. `doc/architecture/locked-vs-flexible.md` open at "Summary table"
6. This file, [`questions.md`](questions.md), and
   [`briefing.md`](briefing.md) for backstop.

## After the meeting

- 30-min decompression — don't take notes during the meeting beyond
  bullet-tracking of Q1–Q5 answers; write up a full memo in the 30 min
  AFTER.
- Memo template:
  ```
  Date:  ____
  Reviewer:  ____
  Duration:  ____ min
  
  Q1 answer (research-track alignment):  ____
  Q2 answer (decorated-DCE API):         ____
  Q3 answer (Phase 9b-analytic):         ____
  Q4 answer (Phase 9c port choice):      ____
  Q5 answer (GC-1 co-authorship):        ____
  Q6 answer (CGAL packaging):            ____
  Q7 "no" pointer:                       ____
  
  Action items:
    [ ] (within 48 h)  ____
    [ ] (within 2 wks) ____
    [ ] (longer term)  ____
  
  Cadence agreed:  ____
  ```

- Store the memo at `doc/reviewer/2026-XX-XX-meeting-notes.md`
  (gitignored if confidential, otherwise committed).
