docs: make README fool-proof for operators (COW-984)#73
Merged
lgahdl merged 1 commit intoMay 29, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Add "Is it working?" section explaining what to check during and after backfill, how to distinguish stuck from slow, and what each health endpoint signals. Addresses client feedback that the README should be fool-proof for operators with no Ponder background. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
jeffersonBastos
approved these changes
May 29, 2026
lgahdl
deleted the
luizhatem/cow-984-docs-make-readme-fool-proof-for-operators-with-no-ponder
branch
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Addresses client feedback: "The README should be fool-proof — someone with no knowledge of Ponder should understand how to run it and tell if it's broken."
Related Issues
COW-984
🤖 Generated with Claude Code