[strategist] planning: define organization portfolio roadmap

docs/README.md

@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ Docs are split by the question they answer:
 ### Plans
 
 - [Org docs-shape and skills rollout](plans/0001-docs-shape-rollout.md)
+- [Organization portfolio stewardship](plans/0002-org-portfolio-roadmap.md)
 
 ## Conventions
 

docs/plans/0002-org-portfolio-roadmap.md

@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
+# Plan: Organization portfolio stewardship
+
+This plan turns core from a shared-material repository into the visible
+planning surface for Frostyard's repository portfolio. It establishes a
+reviewable lifecycle map, measurable adoption of core-managed practices, and
+a quarterly priority cadence without replacing repository-local roadmaps.
+
+## Baseline — 2026-08-12
+
+- 57 organization repositories: 38 active and 19 archived.
+- 24 active repositories received commits in the preceding 30 days.
+- Core-managed skills are configured for 9 active repositories.
+- Core has one indexed rollout plan, one recorded contributor, and no
+  discussions despite organization discussions being enabled.
+- Core distributes reusable skills, templates, documentation, scaffolds, and
+  assets without a declared license.
+
+The baseline is a starting measurement, not a target. Repository activity
+alone does not determine strategic importance or maintenance status.
+
+## Portfolio lifecycle
+
+Every repository will have one explicit state in the portfolio map:
+
+| State | Meaning | Review expectation |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| Strategic | Required for a current organization outcome | Named outcome and near-term milestone |
+| Maintained | Supported and accepting routine change | Named maintainer or team and current support surface |
+| Incubating | Exploring a capability or product direction | Exit criteria and decision date |
+| Maintenance | Supported for existing consumers; limited investment | Compatibility and security commitment |
+| Superseded | Replaced by a named canonical repository | Migration path and archival trigger |
+| Archive candidate | No supported future is intended | Owner confirmation before archival |
+
+The map must name a canonical successor for every superseded repository and
+must distinguish inactivity from an intentional maintenance posture.
+
+## Phase 1 — Publish the portfolio map (near-term)
+
+- Inventory all 57 repositories by product or organization capability.
+- Assign each repository a lifecycle state, accountable owner, canonical
+  successor where applicable, and last review date.
+- Identify the organization-level outcomes for the next 90 days and map each
+  outcome to the repositories that deliver it.
+- Link repository-local plans rather than duplicating their implementation
+  details in core.
+- **Done when:** every repository appears exactly once in an indexed portfolio
+  map, every active repository has an explicit lifecycle state, and every
+  strategic repository is tied to a measurable 90-day outcome.
+
+## Phase 2 — Make shared-practice adoption measurable (near-term)
+
+- Resolve [core#57](https://github.com/frostyard/core/issues/57) by defining
+  which lifecycle states are eligible for core-managed skill sync and which
+  exclusions are intentional.
+- Record coverage, latest successful sync, and sync lag for eligible
+  repositories; set a target and review threshold before expanding the list.
+- Sequence onboarding by strategic importance and risk rather than repository
+  age. Keep rollout mechanics aligned with
+  [ADR-0026](../adr/0026-distribute-core-skills-via-sync-prs.md).
+- Complete the supply-chain work already sequenced in
+  [Plan 0001](0001-docs-shape-rollout.md#phase-4--supply-chain-cleanup)
+  before treating repository coverage as healthy.
+- **Done when:** every eligible repository is either covered by sync or has a
+  dated blocker, and the portfolio review reports both coverage and sync lag.
+
+## Phase 3 — Clarify reuse and contribution governance (near-term)
+
+- Resolve [core#58](https://github.com/frostyard/core/issues/58) with explicit
+  licensing for code/scaffolds, documentation, and brand assets.
+- Adopt a Code of Conduct and reporting path appropriate for the organization
+  hub.
+- Start one discussion for each proposed quarterly priority before promoting
+  it into this roadmap, so maintainers and consumers can supply evidence.
+- Use the existing [quality loop](../design/quality-loop.md) and
+  [PR acceptance metric](../specs/pr-acceptance-metric.md) for changes to core;
+  portfolio health metrics remain observational and must not bypass repository
+  review gates.
+- **Done when:** downstream reuse rights and contribution expectations are
+  explicit, and the next quarterly priorities have an open evidence-gathering
+  discussion.
+
+## Phase 4 — Establish the quarterly review cadence
+
+- Review lifecycle assignments and 90-day outcomes quarterly.
+- Promote, maintain, supersede, or retire incubating work based on stated exit
+  criteria rather than activity alone.
+- Record changed organization-level decisions as ADRs and update this plan as
+  work lands.
+- Track four portfolio signals: strategic outcomes delivered, eligible
+  repositories covered by core sync, median sync lag, and repositories with
+  overdue lifecycle reviews.
+- **Done when:** one quarterly review has updated the portfolio map, recorded
+  decisions and owners, and published the next set of measurable outcomes.
+
+## Later / ideas
+
+- Publish a generated organization dashboard after the lifecycle map and
+  metric definitions are stable.
+- Add external adoption indicators only where a repository has a user-facing
+  product and a reliable signal.
+- Define a standard end-of-life communication template for superseded
+  repositories.
+
+## Open questions
+
+- **Who approves lifecycle-state changes?** Decide before Phase 1 completes;
+  record an ADR if this introduces a new organization governance boundary.
+- **Which repositories are eligible for mandatory core-managed skills?**
+  Resolve through [core#57](https://github.com/frostyard/core/issues/57) by
+  Phase 2.
+- **How are mixed-license assets represented?** Resolve through
+  [core#58](https://github.com/frostyard/core/issues/58) by Phase 3.
+
+## References
+
+- Tracks: [core#56](https://github.com/frostyard/core/issues/56)
+- Builds on:
+  [ADR-0025](../adr/0025-consolidate-repository-docs-into-docs.md),
+  [ADR-0026](../adr/0026-distribute-core-skills-via-sync-prs.md)
+- Coordinates with:
+  [Plan 0001 — Org docs-shape and skills rollout](0001-docs-shape-rollout.md)
+- Uses:
+  [Quality loop](../design/quality-loop.md),
+  [PR acceptance metric](../specs/pr-acceptance-metric.md)