From f459639a0ffc8cc1b740b5ebd7580186771f1bab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: SyniRon <66834451+SyniRon@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 20:50:16 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] chore(triage): record API-docs SSO as out of scope

#216 asked whether the forum's SSO could improve the docs experience for
logged-in members. It was a placeholder with no defined benefit, and it has
been triaged and closed as out of scope: putting a session/SSO layer on the
static docs page for an undefined payoff isn't worth it. This records the
decision in .out-of-scope/docs-sso.md for dedup and institutional memory.

> *This was generated by AI*
---
 .out-of-scope/docs-sso.md | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 .out-of-scope/docs-sso.md

diff --git a/.out-of-scope/docs-sso.md b/.out-of-scope/docs-sso.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..799bef7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.out-of-scope/docs-sso.md
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+# SSO integration with the API docs
+
+The docs surface stays anonymous. There is no plan to wire the forum's SSO into
+the Scalar docs page so logged-in members get a different experience.
+
+## Why this is out of scope
+
+The payoff was never pinned down. The request that raised it (#216) was an open
+placeholder — scope, behavior, and implementation all undecided — with no
+concrete member-facing benefit that being logged in would unlock on a static API
+reference page. Weighed against the work to put a session layer on a surface
+that is currently static embedded assets (`rest.DocsHandler` serves the vendored
+Scalar bundle and the spec verbatim, no cookies, no session), the juice isn't
+worth the squeeze.
+
+This is a value call, not a technical impossibility. If a real, member-facing
+reason for logged-in docs ever turns up, delete this file and let it go through
+triage fresh.
+
+## Prior requests
+
+- #216 — "Investigate SSO integration with the API docs" (placeholder, closed
+  out-of-scope 2026-06-29)