Modernize component state architecture

Why use this

1. A team converting many class components may focus on syntax while overlooking lifecycle timing, state updates and cleanup behavior. A large combined pull request makes it difficult to see which conversion introduced a regression.

2. A batch plan could group manageable components and document the behaviors each conversion must preserve. Maintainers could review boundaries and dependencies before code is changed, with merging and release kept separate from candidate PR creation.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Identify state/lifecycle assumptions and choose reviewable conversion groups without assuming semantic equivalence.

Simpler alternative

Convert a few isolated components manually when their behavior is well understood.

Unsuitable when

Critical side effects or framework conventions lack adequate owner review.

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Component inventory

   Owner

   Maintainer

   Minimum scope

   Relevant class components, dependencies and existing tests

   Quality check

   Identify shared state, side effects and external subscriptions.

2. Name

   Modernization conventions

   Owner

   Engineering owner

   Minimum scope

   Target patterns, allowed scope and review criteria

   Quality check

   Separate required architectural changes from unrelated cleanup.

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Read-only code inventory and an offline batch/review matrix.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Unknown: exact runtime, framework version, tooling and behavior-test coverage.

External actions requiring approval

1. Editing code, pushing PRs, changing shared interfaces or merging/releases.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Conversion batches with component dependencies, preserved behaviors and proposed regression checks.

Critical checks

1. Each batch is independently reviewable and avoids hidden cross-batch assumptions.

2. State timing and cleanup behavior receive explicit attention beyond syntax conversion.

Missing output evidence

No new workflow run or output inspection was performed for this overlay.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   A subscription cleanup is lost during conversion.

   Why it matters

   The component may leak work or react after unmounting.

   Proposed response

   Flag the cleanup requirement and require a targeted behavior check.

2. Signal

   Interdependent components are changed in separate batches without interface coordination.

   Why it matters

   A partial merge could break the application.

   Proposed response

   Sequence the dependency or define a compatible transition before implementation.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Map component relationships and preservation requirements.

Ongoing review

1. Review each batch and actual regression evidence before merging.

Unknowns

1. Unknown: conversion complexity, test adequacy and maintainer-review effort.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

An invented inventory has a subscription-owning component and two components sharing a changed interface.

Acceptance checks

1. Cleanup and sequencing appear as explicit review requirements.

2. No functional equivalence is claimed.

Stop conditions

1. Code changes, behavioral assumptions or merge authority is required.

Limits

1. Editorial refactoring plan; a synthetic batch check is not state-behavior or regression validation.