docs: move journal/voice work to explicit backburner track

Konrad's decision (15 May 2026): Phase A.2 (manual JournalEntry
UI) + Phase B (Letterly inbound webhook) are too complex to
interleave with normal app work — they'll be built and tested
offline on a separate track, not in ai-dev.

Verified there is NOTHING to remove or bypass: zero JournalEntry
model/views/urls/templates, zero Letterly/webhook/@csrf_exempt
code anywhere on ai-dev, latest migration is 0015. The working
app was already 100% clean of journal/voice code — these features
never left the design-doc stage.

Doc changes:
- parked-work.md: "Blocked on Konrad's input" section replaced
  with "🧊 Backburner — separate offline track", with an explicit
  "do NOT start in ai-dev" warning and the nothing-to-remove
  verification recorded.
- CLAUDE.md breadcrumb: reframed from "parked pending Q5/Q7
  answers" (implies ready-to-go once answered) to "deliberately
  deferred to offline track — do not pick up as normal feature
  work".

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

CLAUDE.md

@@ -12,9 +12,16 @@ day is captured in the "DEPLOY ORDERING" bullet of the
 Flatlogic/AppWizzy Deployment section — restart must come AFTER
 the code is pulled, because `DEBUG=False` caches templates.)
 
-Phase A.2 (manual JournalEntry UI) and Phase B (Letterly inbound
-webhook) from the Site Work Logging design are parked pending Q5 / Q7
-answers — see `docs/plans/parked-work.md`.
+**🧊 Backburner — do NOT start in `ai-dev`:** Phase A.2 (manual
+JournalEntry UI) and Phase B (Letterly inbound webhook) are
+deliberately deferred to a separate offline build/test track
+(Konrad's decision, 15 May 2026 — they're complex and will be
+proven offline first). They are NOT "blocked waiting on an answer"
+and should not be picked up as normal feature work. **Nothing
+journal/voice-related exists in the working app** — verified zero
+`JournalEntry`/webhook/`@csrf_exempt` code on `ai-dev`; there was
+never anything to remove. See the "Backburner" section in
+`docs/plans/parked-work.md`.
 
 ## Coding Style
 - Always add clear section header comments using the format: # === SECTION NAME ===

docs/plans/parked-work.md

@@ -28,42 +28,46 @@ Flatlogic Deployment section.
 
 ---
 
-## Blocked on Konrad's input
+## 🧊 Backburner — journal/voice features (separate offline track)
 
-### Phase A.2 — Manual JournalEntry web UI
+> **Decision (15 May 2026):** Konrad parked the entire journal /
+> voice-transcript line of work. It's more complex than the rest of
+> the app and will be built + tested **offline, on a separate
+> track**, NOT mixed into `ai-dev`. **Do NOT start either of these
+> in `ai-dev` or in any normal feature session.** They are not
+> "blocked waiting on an answer" — they are deliberately deferred
+> until Konrad chooses to spin up a dedicated offline effort.
 
-**Status:** Designed in the Site Work Logging brainstorm. Model
-class drafted in the design doc (not yet in `core/models.py`).
-Not yet built.
+**Important — nothing is in the working app.** Verified 15 May 2026:
+zero `JournalEntry` model / views / URLs / templates anywhere in
+`core/`, zero Letterly / webhook / `@csrf_exempt` code on `ai-dev`,
+latest migration is `0015_absence_project`. There is no dead code,
+no feature flag, no migration to reverse. "Removing" these was a
+no-op — they were never built into the running app. The working
+app (`ai-dev` + production) is completely clean of journal/voice
+code.
 
-**Blocked on:** Q7 from the original brainstorm — "Who is Vi?" The
-answer drives whether `JournalEntry` needs a `recipient` or
-`audience` field (i.e. is this a public log, or does it have
-specific addressees like a client). **Default if unanswered:** no
-recipient field — entries are all-admin-readable.
+### Phase A.2 — Manual JournalEntry web UI (deferred)
 
-**Scope when unblocked:** ~1 hour of work. Manual entry form at
-`/journal/new/`, list at `/journal/`, edit at `/journal/<id>/edit/`.
-Admin-only views. Lives on `ai-dev` (no webhook involvement).
+Designed in the Site Work Logging brainstorm (`~/.claude/plans/
+prancy-painting-brook.md`, local). A `JournalEntry` model + manual
+entry form/list/edit, admin-only. Open question if/when resumed:
+**Q7 "Who is Vi?"** — drives whether `JournalEntry` needs a
+`recipient`/`audience` field. Default if never answered: no
+recipient field, all-admin-readable. ~1 hour scope. When resumed,
+build on the offline track first, not directly in `ai-dev`.
 
-### Phase B — Letterly inbound webhook (`integrations` branch)
+### Phase B — Letterly inbound webhook (deferred)
 
-**Status:** Designed in the Site Work Logging brainstorm. Belongs
-on the `integrations` branch, **not** `ai-dev`.
-
-**Blocked on:** Q5 from the original brainstorm — Konrad needs to
-share a sample Letterly webhook payload. Need to know:
-- Does it include the recording user (so we can map to a Django User)?
-- Does it include project / location metadata, or just the transcript?
-- Does it include an audio URL for link-back?
-- Does Letterly support custom fields (so a deep-link from
-  `/site-report/<id>/edit/` could embed a `work_log_id` that the
-  webhook reads back)?
-
-**Scope when unblocked:** ~3-4 hours including tests + one-off
-Letterly account setup. Adds a `@csrf_exempt` view at
-`/webhooks/letterly/`, `JournalEntry` row creation, HMAC body
-verification, shared-secret URL token.
+Designed in the same brainstorm. A `@csrf_exempt` view at
+`/webhooks/letterly/` that creates `JournalEntry` rows from voice
+transcripts, with HMAC body verification + shared-secret URL token.
+Open question if/when resumed: **Q5 — a sample Letterly webhook
+payload** (does it include the recording user / project metadata /
+audio URL / custom fields?). ~3-4 hours scope + one-off Letterly
+account setup. This was always meant to live on the `integrations`
+branch, never `ai-dev` — and now it's offline-track until Konrad
+revisits.
 
 ---