FS26
Ctrl K
Phase 34 · Lesson 12

Production Launch Runbook and Phase Exit

≈ 2 min core reading · 166 source/companion words
Learning contract

What you should be able to do after this

  • Explain Production Launch Runbook and Phase Exit without relying on framework buzzwords.
  • Connect the lesson to the phase outcome: Deploy the real topology—Next.js, NestJS image, Supabase services, migrations, domains/TLS/CORS, secrets, health checks, smoke tests, and rollback—as one release system.
  • Reproduce the relevant behavior and verify it with evidence.
  • Diagnose at least one representative failure instead of guessing.
Figure 34.12 — TaskFlow boundary map
verified commit/artifact
migration gate
Vercel web + API host
Supabase prod services
DNS/TLS
smoke test
monitor/rollback
This lesson belongs to Phase 34. Keep the full request/data path visible even when today's code changes only one box.
Instructor workflow: predict first → implement the smallest slice → run it → inspect evidence → break one assumption → diagnose → explain it back. Do not copy the whole code block before understanding the first failing boundary.

Production Launch Runbook and Phase Exit The final lab turns the deployment architecture into a checklist a team can actually follow. The release is complete only when application behavior, infrastructure health, security configuration, and recovery paths have all been verified.

Before release • CI green for the exact commit

• Production secrets/config verified

• Supabase Site URL + redirect allowlist verified

• Database migration reviewed and recovery posture confirmed

• Domains/DNS prepared

• API health endpoints verified in staging

Release • Run production migration job

• Deploy exact API SHA and wait for readiness

• Deploy/promote web from verified commit

• Run unauthenticated then authenticated smoke tests

• Watch logs, metrics, traces, Sentry, DB health during observation window

Done-when • HTTPS custom domains work

• Auth sign-in/confirmation works

• Authorized CRUD works

• Cross-workspace authorization still blocks access

• Storage/Realtime production checks pass where enabled

• Rollback procedure has been rehearsed and documented Phase exit: TaskFlow is no longer only "production-ready code"; it now has a repeatable production launch and recovery process.

Source basis: integrated TaskFlow production release checklist.

Executable lesson studio · deployment

Now turn the explanation into engineering skill.

Deployment is the controlled movement of a versioned artifact into a configured runtime with evidence of health and a credible rollback path.

By the end, you should be able to

  • Explain Production Launch Runbook and Phase Exit in terms of concrete inputs, ownership, outputs, and evidence.
  • Implement or reproduce the smallest TaskFlow slice that demonstrates this deployment concept.
  • Diagnose one representative deployment failure using observable evidence instead of trial-and-error.
Figure 34.12B — Mental model
versioned artifact
production config
runtime
health/smoke test
rollback path
Read left-to-right while implementing. When debugging, walk right-to-left until the first observed fact differs from your prediction.
Code-along sequence

One coherent change at a time

  1. 01

    Restate the goal of “Production Launch Runbook and Phase Exit” as one observable behavior. Write the success signal before touching code.

  2. 02

    Trace the boundary map: versioned artifact → production config → runtime → health/smoke test → rollback path. Mark the one boundary this lesson changes.

  3. 03

    Inspect the current repository state and record the exact files, route, table, or runtime involved. Avoid creating an abstraction before you can name the existing owner.

  4. 04

    Implement the smallest vertical slice. Add one coherent change, run the narrowest verification command, and read the output before continuing.

  5. 05

    Connect the slice to TaskFlow’s phase artifact: Staging and production deployment runbooks with release identity, environment matrix, smoke tests, and rollback procedure.. Verify behavior from the outside as a user or API client would.

  6. 06

    Create one controlled failure that is safe to reproduce. Predict the symptom first, capture evidence, locate the earliest broken boundary, then fix only that cause.

  7. 07

    Close the reference and rebuild or explain the core change from memory. Record what you would monitor or test before trusting the same change in production.

txtRelease runbook, not a vague deploy button
1. Build an immutable artifact.
2. Apply production configuration/secrets.
3. Run compatible migrations.
4. Start the new version.
5. Check readiness and smoke tests.
6. Observe errors/latency.
7. Promote or execute rollback.

Do not copy this as a finished answer. Predict what each boundary does, type the smallest useful slice, run it, then compare the result with your prediction.

Verification

Prove the happy path

  1. Run the narrowest relevant command or request and require a clean exit/status.
  2. Inspect the boundary-specific evidence: terminal output, Network panel, database row/query plan, test report, container health, or deployment logs.
  3. Repeat the behavior once after the change so a one-off cached or stale result cannot masquerade as success.
Break it on purpose

Build debugging memory

  1. Rollback plan assumes schema can always be downgraded
  2. Change one assumption in the deployment example—identity, input, configuration, ordering, connectivity, or state—and predict the exact symptom before running it.
SymptomInvestigation path
Deployment is green but app fails

Separate platform deploy status from application readiness; run smoke tests against real routes and dependencies.

New release breaks schema compatibility

Use expand/contract migrations and keep rollback compatibility explicit before release.

Closed-reference challenge

Can you transfer the idea?

Without copying the final source, create a second small scenario that applies “Production Launch Runbook and Phase Exit” to a different TaskFlow resource or input. Write the acceptance criteria first, implement it, and provide the evidence that each criterion is satisfied.

Explain-back

Answer these without reopening the solution

  1. What problem does Production Launch Runbook and Phase Exit solve in TaskFlow, and what would be observably wrong without it?
  2. Which part of the deployment boundary owns the decision, and which neighboring layer must not own it?
  3. What evidence proves the happy path instead of merely suggesting it worked?
  4. Name one realistic failure or abuse case and the first place you would inspect.
  5. If requirements doubled tomorrow, which part of this design should stay stable and which part is allowed to change?
Lesson studio

Turn the reading into skill

01

Do it

Run a smoke-test checklist and practice rollback of code while reasoning about whether the database migration is reversible.

Use the smallest change that demonstrates this lesson. Stop after it works and capture evidence.
02

Break it safely

Rollback plan assumes schema can always be downgraded

Predict the symptom before causing the failure. Then locate the earliest boundary where reality diverges from expectation.
03

Explain it back

Why does this responsibility live here, what input does it trust, what output proves success, and what would go wrong if another layer owned it?

If your explanation is vague, repeat the boundary trace before moving on.
Exit ticket

Before marking complete

Close the reference. Reproduce the core idea from memory or explain the exact request/data flow aloud. Then check your diff or notes for accidental shortcuts that bypass validation, authorization, error handling, or verification earned in earlier phases.

← Rollback Recovery and Incident DecisionsGuided Build Lab →