--- type: types/instruction.md name: private-instance description: Set up a private working instance as a clone of a public upstream, so stack updates arrive by merge instead of by copying a tarball over the tree. --- # Set up a private instance against a public upstream The distribution path in [setup-instance.md](setup-instance.md) builds an instance from a `dist export` tarball, with no git ancestry in common with the repo it came from. That is the right shape for someone who only ever *consumes* the stack. This is the other shape: a private instance that keeps taking stack changes from a public upstream, and whose own content must never travel back. It costs one safeguard to set up and saves the whole update procedure afterwards. **Read this before, not after, the first `publish`.** The gate in step 4 is the thing that makes the arrangement safe, and adding it later means the window it closes was open in between. ## Why a clone rather than a tarball `INSTALL.md`'s "Eine Instanz aktualisieren" is `cp -r` as an upgrade strategy: copy `tools/`, `types/`, `instructions/`, `AGENTS.md`, `VERSION` over the existing tree. It has no three-way merge, so it cannot notice that the receiving instance changed a file, and it has no conflict surface, so nobody learns when upstream and local both touched the same one. It overwrites silently. A clone gets all of that from git. Stack changes land as real merges, with real conflicts where they conflict. **What a plain `git merge` does *not* give you is protection from the upstream's content.** The private `main` deletes the demo corpus once, but that deletion does not make later upstream changes to those paths go away. Measured, not assumed: | Upstream does | `git merge upstream/main` does | |---|---| | modifies a page you deleted | `CONFLICT (modify/delete)` - and **leaves the upstream version in your working tree**. Resolve it with `git add -A` and the demo page is back. | | adds a new page | stages it **silently**. No conflict, no prompt, no mention. | | deletes a page you also deleted | nothing. The only harmless case. | The middle row is the one that matters, because nothing announces it. An upstream that ships a demo corpus *and* uses it as a test bed will add pages, and each one arrives in your instance and starts showing up in your `lint`, your `index`, your `search` and your `confidence decay`. So the merge has to be scoped. That is the procedure below, and it is not optional. ## Steps 1. **Clone, and name the two remotes for what they are.** ```bash git clone my-wiki cd my-wiki git remote add upstream ``` `origin` is yours and is the only thing you ever push to. `upstream` is where stack updates come from and is fetch-only. 2. **Make the fetch-only half fetch-only in git, too.** ```bash git remote set-url --push upstream no_push ``` git refuses to push to a URL it cannot resolve. This is a convenience, not the safeguard - step 4 is the safeguard. 3. **Delete the upstream's demo corpus once, on your own `main`.** Everything under `kb/` and `raw/` that came with the clone is the upstream's content, not yours. Remove it with `wikitool rm --page` (never `rm -rf`: `rm` de-links each page from the rest of the wiki, and a plain delete leaves dead wikilinks and broken citations behind), then `index rebuild`, `sources rebuild-index`, `lint`. This is a one-time cut. Afterwards the upstream corpus is frozen from your side, which is what makes later merges content-free. 4. **Arm the Publish-Remote Gate — before the first `publish`.** ```bash cat > .wikitool-remotes.json <<'EOF' { "schema": 1, "allowed_push_urls": [""] } EOF ``` Use the URL `git remote get-url --push origin` prints, exactly. `publish` refuses with exit 42 for anything else, and there is no flag that opens it - see [gates.md](gates.md). The file is gitignored, so it stays with this checkout and never travels to the upstream. `wikitool doctor` reports whether the gate is armed, and WARNs at more than one remote without it. 5. **Take away the write credential, if you can.** A token or deploy key for `origin` only, with no write access to the upstream, is the one control that holds even if everything above is misconfigured. Belt and braces. 6. **Personalize and bootstrap.** `USER.md`, `SOUL.md` and optionally `ENVIRONMENT.md` are yours and unrelated to the upstream's - see the Personalization step of [setup-instance.md](setup-instance.md), then [bootstrap.md](bootstrap.md) for the venv and the skills. ## Taking a stack update Take the machinery, never the content. The merge is held open, the content stages are forced back to your own state, and only then does it close: ```bash BEFORE=$(git rev-parse HEAD) git fetch upstream # --no-commit holds the merge open; it may report conflicts under kb/ or raw/, # which the next three lines are about to make irrelevant. git merge --no-commit --no-ff upstream/main || true # Whatever the merge did to the content stages, undo it. HEAD is still your # pre-merge commit while the merge is open, so this restores exactly your side. git rm -rq --cached --ignore-unmatch kb raw rm -rf kb raw git checkout HEAD -- kb raw git commit --no-edit ``` Then **check that it worked**, rather than trusting that it did: ```bash git diff --name-only $BEFORE HEAD -- kb raw # must print nothing ``` An empty result is the proof that the update touched machinery only. A non-empty one means a path slipped through - inspect it before going further. Then, as after any stack change: `doctor`, `docs verify`, `instructions verify`, `migrate status`, `lint`. A `migrate status` with outstanding links means the update crossed a compatibility boundary - follow [migrate-corpus.md](migrate-corpus.md) before doing anything else. **Why not just `git merge upstream/main`?** Because of the table above: a page the upstream *adds* arrives with no conflict and no message. You would find out when `lint` starts reporting pages you never wrote - if you noticed at all. ## Where stack development happens **In the public repo, not here.** That is not a preference; the stack is built that way. The development-only half of the instruction layer is pruned from a distribution one-way, with no command that reconstructs it, so an instance built this way has no tool-development mode to switch into in the first place. When a tool bug blocks real content work here - and it will - file the issue against the public repo (an MCP server or the web UI reaches it from any session; no shared history needed), fix it there where the tests, `docs verify` and CI's version gate live, and take the fix back with the merge above. Nothing is lost by the detour: the fix has to pass that CI either way. ## Decision points - **Merge conflict in `kb/` or `raw/`?** Expected, and already handled: the update procedure above overwrites those stages with your own afterwards, so the conflict resolves itself. Never resolve one by hand with `git add -A` - that is exactly how the upstream version, which git left sitting in your working tree, gets committed into your instance. - **`git diff` after the merge shows something under `kb/` or `raw/`?** Stop. The scoping step did not take. Do not publish; find out which path came through and where from. - **Conflict in `tools/`, `types/` or `instructions/`?** You changed the stack locally, which step "Where stack development happens" says not to do. Take the upstream side and re-file the change as an issue there. ## Scope Not for a first instance with no upstream - that is [setup-instance.md](setup-instance.md). Not for a fresh clone of a repo you already own and develop in - that is [bootstrap.md](bootstrap.md). This is specifically the two-remote case, where the cost of a mistaken push is disclosure rather than inconvenience.