Rehearse preference enforcement from settings through provider acknowledgement
Unit tests cover the checkbox and worker separately, but not a user changing a preference while replicas lag and provider requests are in flight.
- Focused work estimate
- 4h 30m + prerequisites
- Priority in the scenario
- Medium
- Engineering practice
- Workflow testing · Policy enforcement
Estimated field mix
- Quality engineering40%
- Privacy engineering40%
- Integrations20%
Field percentages are editorial estimates of the ticket's engineering focus. They total 100%; they are not measured time, proficiency scores, or ownership evidence.
Review it, then add it to your workspace.
The board opens an editable draft; nothing is saved until you confirm it. Sign-in and workspace permissions apply, and Demo boards remain ephemeral.
Project context
A fictional event workspace offers optional product announcements and operational booking messages. Its product policy treats these as separate purposes. A stale audience cache currently sends optional messages after a member opts out. The brief implements fictional preference rules and makes no legal-consent certification.
Setup prerequisites
- Create synthetic members, versioned notice text and two purpose-tagged message types.
- Use a fake dispatch provider with controllable queueing and acknowledgement; send no real messages.
Preceding work
Complete these dependencies, or supply their agreed outputs before taking this ticket.
- RCONSENT-101 · Separate optional announcements from booking operations
- RCONSENT-102 · Record the notice version shown when a preference changes
- RCONSENT-103 · Make the preference form submit the user’s explicit final choice
- RCONSENT-104 · Recheck optional-message eligibility immediately before provider dispatch
- RCONSENT-105 · Bind a queued announcement to its purpose and content revision
- RCONSENT-106 · Stop an opt-out retry from being lost behind an older opt-in event
- RCONSENT-107 · Explain which queued messages an opt-out can still prevent
- RCONSENT-108 · Expose preference history only to its subject and scoped support role
- RCONSENT-109 · Reconcile audience caches without restoring old optional choices
Acceptance criteria
- Run a deterministic end-to-end matrix of opt-in/out, replica delay, queued work and provider acknowledgement.
- Reconcile every provider request with the exact purpose, content and evaluated preference revisions.
- Report tested conditions and unavoidable in-flight limits without claiming legal consent compliance.
Implementation constraints
- All deliveries terminate at a fake provider; the exercise never sends messages to real recipients.
Verification to include
- Exercise out-of-order events and opt-out at each dispatch boundary.
- Fail preference lookup and provider acknowledgement separately, then verify retries cannot send an ineligible optional message.
Deliverables
- Preference-enforcement rehearsal and decision trace
Rollout and recovery
Enable the full synthetic workflow only after the matrix passes; hold optional dispatch when authority or revision consistency is unresolved.
Value of the work
For the engineer: Practice purpose modeling, versioned user choices, dispatch-time checks and consistency under retries.
For the team: Create an inspectable preference workflow that can be reviewed against a company-approved communication policy.
Evidence boundaries
Outcome Evidence: Tests, patches, and runbooks are requested deliverables. They become Outcome Evidence only through a qualified Mission and immutable Evidence IDs.
Ownership Evidence: Independent adaptation must be observed under a declared verification policy and cite immutable Evidence IDs. Completing a planning ticket establishes no Ownership Evidence.