GloriousFlywheel Template Consumer Mode Decision 2026-04-18
Snapshot date: 2026-04-18
Purpose
Resolve the remaining ambiguity around recent template consumers.
The key question is not “do these repos use ci-templates?”
The key question is:
- what mode are they actually using
- should that mode count toward runner enrollment
Current Evidence
tinyland-inc/tinyvectors
Both current workflow entrypoints on main are explicit:
ci.ymlrunner_mode: hostedworkspace_mode: isolatedpublish_mode: same_runner
publish.ymlrunner_mode: hostedworkspace_mode: isolatedpublish_mode: same_runner
This means tinyvectors is no longer ambiguous.
It is an explicit hosted consumer of js-bazel-package.yml.
Hosted npm-publish.yml Family
The reusable workflow tinyland-inc/ci-templates/.github/workflows/npm-publish.yml
still hardcodes GitHub-hosted execution:
build-and-testruns-on: ubuntu-latest
publish-gprruns-on: ubuntu-latest
publish-npmruns-on: ubuntu-latest
Recent repos consuming that hosted workflow include:
tinyland-inc/vite-plugin-a11ytinyland-inc/tinyland-rate-limittinyland-inc/tinyland-physicstinyland-inc/tinyland-color-utilstinyland-inc/tinyland-a11y-engine
Those repos are therefore explicit hosted template consumers too.
Repo-Owned Template Consumers
The current clean repo-owned template consumers on main remain:
Jesssullivan/scheduling-kitJesssullivan/acuity-middleware
Those repos pass:
runner_labels_json: ${{ vars.PRIMARY_LINUX_RUNNER_LABELS_JSON }}
through js-bazel-package.yml.
Decision
Use three template-consumer buckets in reporting:
1. Hosted Template Consumers
Count here:
tinyland-inc/tinyvectorstinyland-inc/vite-plugin-a11ytinyland-inc/tinyland-rate-limittinyland-inc/tinyland-physicstinyland-inc/tinyland-color-utilstinyland-inc/tinyland-a11y-engine
These repos should not count toward runner enrollment.
2. Repo-Owned Template Consumers
Count here:
Jesssullivan/scheduling-kitJesssullivan/acuity-middleware
These repos do count toward runner enrollment.
3. Shared Template Consumers
Count here only when a repo explicitly uses a shared ARC mode in workflow code.
Current recent examples on the scanned surface:
- none proven through template call sites
What Changes Operationally
tinyvectors
This repo no longer needs a “make runner intent explicit” task.
That task is already done.
The real question is now:
- should
tinyvectorsremain a hosted template consumer - or should it be explicitly promoted to
sharedorrepo_owned
That is a future migration choice, not a current truthing task.
npm-publish.yml Family
This family should be treated as hosted-by-current-policy unless and until the workflow itself changes.
That means:
- no more overcounting those repos as runner-adjacent enrollments
- no more treating raw
ci-templatesconsumption as evidence of runner use
Recommendation
Immediately update GloriousFlywheel reporting and queue language so that:
tinyvectorsis classified as an explicit hosted template consumer- the
npm-publish.ymlfamily is classified as hosted template consumers - only
js-bazel-package.ymlrepos using explicitsharedorrepo_ownedinputs count toward runner adoption
Exit Condition
This note can retire once:
- template mode reporting is standard everywhere in GloriousFlywheel docs
tinyvectorseither remains intentionally hosted or is explicitly promoted- the
npm-publish.ymlfamily is either clearly hosted-by-policy or migrated onto a new self-hosted-capable contract