Iterative Development Workflow for HMP

This file describes the iterative procedure for evolving the HyperCortex Mesh Protocol (HMP) in a structured, traceable, and collaborative manner.

🔄 Version Naming Convention

000N — current specification version
000K — next version (000N + 1)

Example:

HMP-0003.md           ← current spec
HMP-0003-audit.txt    ← feedback for current spec
HMP-0004.md           ← next draft spec
HMP-0004-audit.txt    ← feedback for next spec

📑 Iteration Steps

№	Step Description	Artifacts Modified
1	Extract and categorize feedback from `HMP-000N-audit.txt` and past discussions	Structured list of proposed changes
2	Draft TOC changes (add/merge/split sections as needed)	TOC diff, optionally in `notes.md`
3	Create draft `HMP-000K.md` with new TOC	`HMP-000K.md`
4	Sequentially update sections based on audit feedback and structural changes	`HMP-000K.md`
5	Full-spec review, cleanup, refinement	`HMP-000K.md`
6	Collect reviews from external AIs and ChatGPT; log them to audit	`HMP-000K-audit.txt`
7	Update `README.md`, `changelog.txt`, and JSON Schemas (if needed)	Various

📘 Version Control Guidelines

Commit messages should follow the pattern:

\[HMP-000K\:iteration#X] Short description of change

For clarifications or editorial decisions, create:

clarifications/HMP-000K-notes.md

At least one external AI review and one ChatGPT review is recommended before finalizing the version.

🧠 ChatGPT Prompt (for future use)

You are acting as a cognitive agent evolving the HMP (HyperCortex Mesh Protocol).
Use input files `HMP-0003.md` and `HMP-0003-audit.txt`.

Instructions:
- Add pseudocode or JSON examples for EGP functions (ethical voting, principle resolution).
- Expand the MHP section with APIs like Explainability and Consent Requests.
- Ensure consistency with `HMP-Ethics.md` and EGP principles.
- Add a Changelog with attributions (Grok, ChatGPT, User).
- Use Mesh-style terminology: CogSync, MeshConsensus, Cognitive Diary.

Your output should be a Markdown file: `HMP-0004.md`

🧠 Audit Consolidation Format

When feedback is collected from multiple sources (e.g. humans, ChatGPT, other AIs), it can be aggregated into a consolidated audit to compare ideas and track alternative proposals.

Use the following structure to create such a consolidated view:

[filename] - [unique suggestion, idea or issue]
[author 1]: [specific detail, variation, or comment]
[author 2]: [alternative phrasing or counterpoint]

Example:

HMP-0004.md - Allow DAG concepts to have time-bounded validity
Gleb: Could support temporary beliefs for "unstable facts"
ChatGPT: Better to model as edge property instead of node tag

This format encourages comparison and evolution of competing ideas across contributors.

You may optionally track this using a semantic format:

🧩 Purpose

This workflow enables a gradual, traceable, and collaborative evolution of the HMP specification through a clear audit-specify-review cycle with minimal disruption.

It also lays the foundation for future automation through AuditEntry.json and semantic logs.

📌 TODO & Notes

Consider adding a table-based format to audit files for easier parsing.
Maintain semantic_repo.json in sync with each new spec version.
Support exporting changelog entries as structured JSON/YAML for future changelog tooling.