Generated at: 2026-07-30T12:38:02.000Z UTC · source: committed helm-expt evidence for this proof page.
Current Proof Counters
These counters are not one giant green badge. Each lane checks a different question, and production use still depends on target scope and fresh evidence.
What Each Lane Proves
| Lane | Question | Evidence | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Render parity | Does cub installer preserve the Helm object set for this chart/version/base? | Helm render receipt and installer comparison. | Per chart, version, base, values, capability profile, and flag profile. |
| ConfigHub proof | Can the rendered objects become Units, scans, safe ops, and receipts? | ConfigHub proof receipts, function scan receipts, safe-ops receipts. | Does not prove a GitOps controller or workload health by itself. |
| Local live | Does this package apply and converge on a Kubernetes target? | Observation receipt, workload checks, PVC/CRD/secret evidence where relevant. | Usually local kind; target-specific production support still needs scope. |
| GitOps/OCI live | Can ConfigHub-published OCI be reconciled by Argo? | Argo sync and health in the live parity receipt. | A green sync is not enough unless runtime checks also pass. |
| Live dual parity | Does regular Helm reach the same live outcome as ConfigHub delivery? | Strict live Helm-vs-ConfigHub parity receipt. | Selected rows only; absence is backlog, not a failed chart. |
| Two-cluster kind parity | Does Helm on one vanilla kind cluster match installer output on another? | Two-cluster parity receipt. | Narrowest clean parity test; no ConfigHub/OCI proof unless separately recorded. |
| Lifecycle observation | Are hooks, CRDs, webhooks, generated facts, or target prerequisites observed or routed? | Lifecycle, hook, target-fact, and serious-chart receipts. | Partial by design; some rows are routed, blocked, per-target, or refused. |
Use Verification for the command map, Verification Lanes for lane meanings, and Chain Of Proof for the boundary between repo evidence, ConfigHub, GitOps, and live observations.
Serious Charts Are The Test
Hard charts are where mistakes hurt: kube-prometheus-stack, cert-manager, External Secrets, Argo Workflows, Argo Rollouts, stateful databases, and charts with hooks, CRDs, webhooks, generated secrets, storage, or target facts.
This is the expert/SRE problem. Before a fleet change ships, someone needs to know what it touches, what the cluster must already provide, which checks passed, how it will be delivered, and what the live system reported afterward.
For these charts, a green render is not enough. The page must say which prerequisites are required, which lifecycle route is selected, what the target observed, and whether the production scope is accepted, superseded, rejected, or still under review.
kube-prometheus-stack
Upgrade crash example
How a high-risk Helm upgrade becomes staged, rehearsed, gated, and observed.
cert-manager and ESO
Lifecycle observations for CRDs, webhooks, and controller-populated fields.
Argo Workflows
Hook-delivered CRDs routed through the lifecycle boundary.
Argo Rollouts
Default and no-crds bases now have live Helm-vs-ConfigHub parity receipts.
Hooks
Top-100 hook dispositions separate observed, routed, per-target, and recipe-needed rows.
Sceptic Tests
A breaking chart is useful QA. It needs to become a test fixture, a named refusal, or a routed gap. It must not disappear into prose.
Use the problem chart issue template to send a public chart, values file, or catalog mismatch.
| Surface | What it answers | Open |
|---|---|---|
| Claims register | Every public claim is backed, partial, planned, or refused. | ../data/claims-register/summary.md |
| Blast-radius accuracy | Predicted affected objects are scored against actual rerender diffs, including published failures. | ../data/blast-radius-accuracy/summary.md |
| Synthetic torture suite | Breaker charts land in named pass, refusal, or route outcomes; silent outcomes fail. | ../data/torture-suite/summary.md |
| Environment matrix | Renders are checked across timezone and locale cells for the measured corpus. | ../data/environment-matrix/summary.md |
| Hook dispositions | Hook-bearing top-100 charts have observed, routed, per-target, or recipe-needed dispositions. | ../data/hook-disposition/summary.md |
| Master matrix | Every chart/version/base row carries lane status, source links, production scope, and next action. | ./matrix.html |
What This Does Not Claim
| Refusal | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| No blanket chart support | Every claim names chart, version, base, lane, and target profile. |
| No whole-values-space proof | The catalog proves named bases. Custom values must be rendered, checked, and recorded with receipts. |
| No universal hook execution | Hooks are inventoried and routed; execution is claimed only with live evidence. |
| No production claim from render parity | Production support requires target-scoped decisions and fresh receipts. |
| No signature-as-safety shortcut | Signatures prove origin/integrity. Scans, policies, and live evidence carry safety claims. |