Ask for access
See it at work

BrakelineFrom a repeated rollout to a better product

Two weekends. For every customer.

Brakeline took two weekends to move its warehouses to single sign-on. Kelderby faces the same process, with eighteen more sites to follow. Tom asks whether ACME can remove the repeated setup without putting every warehouse at risk at once.

  • TomSales
  • MiraSecurity

ACME is a fictional software company using Emargen.

01Initiatives · Investigate the opportunity

Bring the customer plans and the code together.

Tom opens an initiative with the problem he keeps seeing. Its agent reads Brakeline's rollout, Kelderby's plan, the sign-on checklist and the identity service's code. It uses those sources to draft the brief, then asks a question the evidence cannot decide: should a warehouse switch if it has not passed its test sign-in?

Tom · SalesFrames the improvement around customers already going through it.

EmargenInitiative · Sources for the brief · ACM-293

One recurring problem. Four places to look.

Brakeline

The previous rollout

Kelderby

The next customer's plan

Checklist

Tests before switching

Identity service

How a site switches today

The agent reads these sources before drafting the brief.

02Initiatives · Decide the requirements

Faster cannot mean everyone gets locked out.

Tom chooses: only warehouses whose tests passed may switch. If one has trouble, an administrator must be able to switch that warehouse back alone. The agent writes these choices into the requirements, alongside preserving active sessions. Untested sites keep their current passwords. Automatic account creation is left out: it is a separate feature, not part of this change.

Tom · SalesSets the safety conditions the implementation must meet.

EmargenInitiative · Requirements · ACM-293

The safeguards stay in the plan.

  1. R1

    Only sites that passed their test switch.

  2. R2

    People already signed in stay signed in.

  3. R3

    Switch one site back independently.

Sites left out are named and keep their existing passwords.

03Initiatives · Approaches to implementation

Compare the options against those conditions.

At Tom's request, the agent compares a controlled switch for every tested site with batches spread over a weekend. A focused code investigation checks whether one identity connection can serve them all and whether existing sessions survive. Both are confirmed. The batch proposal, as written, misses the test check and only partly addresses the repeated rollout. The controlled switch is chosen.

Tom · SalesAsks the agent to evaluate both approaches before planning delivery.

EmargenInitiative · Approaches to implementation · ACM-293

A choice with the checks behind it.

Chosen approach

One controlled switch, from the rehearsal list.

Other approach

Batches over a weekend; the proposed plan misses the test check.

Code investigation SP1 confirms the shared connection and session behaviour.

04Initiatives · Prepare for approval

Make the improvement specific enough to approve.

Tom asks the agent to break the chosen approach into delivery slices. First comes the rehearsal list; then the switch, individual rollback and manager notifications. The published plan shows the requirements, chosen approach and checks together. Mira has reviewed the sign-in changes. Approval is still pending, and a question about where notifications get manager details remains visible.

Mira · SecurityHas reviewed the security implications; the plan still awaits approval.

EmargenInitiative · Published plan · ACM-293

Two slices. One explicit approval.

  1. 01

    Rehearse every warehouse · ACM-294

  2. 02

    Switch tested sites, with a way back · ACM-295

Published · Waiting for approval. The new capability has not shipped.

Try it on a repeated setup.

Pick something your team sets up the same way for every customer. See how the evidence becomes a plan with its safeguards in it.

Bring your first initiative →

Early access · We reply by email.