Spaces:
Paused
Paused
| ================================================================================ | |
| WIDGETBOARD ENTERPRISE PLATFORM - FEATURE BACKLOG | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| Product Backlog (Future Phases) | |
| Created: 2025-11-16 18:22 UTC | |
| Release Manager: Claude Code Agent (Autonomous) | |
| Authority: System Director (Claus) | |
| IMPORTANT: Nothing in this backlog belongs in Phase 1 (scope discipline). | |
| Phase 1 = Dashboard Shell + Registry 2.0 + Component System only. | |
| All items below are Phase 2+ planning. | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| BACKLOG ITEMS (PRIORITY ORDER) | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| BACKLOG-01: DeepSeek Integration Hub | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Integration Platform | |
| SOURCE: deepseek-integration-hub project | |
| PHASE: Phase 2+ (after Phase 1 complete) | |
| PRIORITY: High (strategic - AI orchestration) | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Universal MCP-like middleware for DeepSeek and other AI service integrations. | |
| Plugin-based system that provides unified API across multiple AI backends. | |
| CURRENT STATE: | |
| - Project exists: C:\Users\claus\Projects\deepseek-integration-hub | |
| - 3-layer architecture: Types, Registry, Hub | |
| - DeepSeek CLI integration complete (chat, code, analyze actions) | |
| - MIT licensed | |
| ARCHITECTURE OVERVIEW: | |
| Application Layer | |
| ↓ | |
| Integration Hub (Unified API) | |
| ↓ | |
| ┌────┬─────┬─────────┐ | |
| ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ | |
| DeepSeek Dify FastGPT ... | |
| KEY FEATURES: | |
| ✓ Plugin interface for new integrations | |
| ✓ Plugin registry management | |
| ✓ Action-based execution (each integration defines actions) | |
| ✓ JSON schema for action parameters | |
| ✓ Initialize/destroy lifecycle | |
| ROADMAP FROM PROJECT: | |
| - [ ] Event system (progress tracking) | |
| - [ ] Workflow orchestration | |
| - [ ] Multi-agent coordination | |
| - [ ] REST API wrapper | |
| - [ ] CLI for hub management | |
| WIDGET POTENTIAL: | |
| - "AI Orchestrator Widget" - Unified interface for all AI services | |
| - "DeepSeek Chat Widget" - Direct integration | |
| - "Code Generator Widget" - AI-powered code generation | |
| - "Analysis Widget" - AI analysis of documents/code | |
| INTEGRATION APPROACH: | |
| 1. Extract Hub as shared package (@widget-tdc/deepseek-hub) | |
| 2. Create AI Orchestrator widget that uses Hub | |
| 3. Allow widgets to call Hub actions | |
| 4. Enable widget-to-AI workflows | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: | |
| - Package extraction: 1-2 days | |
| - Widget integration: 3-5 days | |
| - Testing/validation: 2-3 days | |
| - Total: ~1 week for Phase 2 | |
| NOTES: | |
| - Could power intelligent widget suggestions | |
| - Could enable AI-assisted configuration | |
| - Strategic for enterprise AI integration trend | |
| - Positions WidgetBoard as AI-native platform | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-02: Cyberstreams Security Intelligence Modules | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Security Widgets | |
| SOURCE: https://github.com/Clauskraft/cyberstreams-v2 project | |
| PHASE: Phase 3-4 (advanced widgets) | |
| PRIORITY: High (security + compliance) | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Extract modular components from Cyberstreams V2 (cybersecurity intelligence | |
| platform) into specialized WidgetBoard widgets. Enables security monitoring | |
| within dashboard ecosystem. | |
| CURRENT STATE: | |
| - Project: Open-source cybersecurity intelligence platform | |
| - Production-ready with Railway deployment | |
| - Tech stack: Fastify (API), OpenSearch (indexing), MinIO (storage) | |
| - Comprehensive audit tooling included | |
| - Legal/compliance framework built-in | |
| EXTRACTABLE MODULES FOR WIDGETS: | |
| 1. Feed Ingestion Engine Widget | |
| Purpose: Monitor RSS feeds for threat intelligence | |
| Features: | |
| - Multiple feed sources | |
| - Real-time updates | |
| - Feed normalization | |
| Applicable: Phase 3 | |
| 2. Search Interface Widget | |
| Purpose: Real-time threat search and filtering | |
| Features: | |
| - Query building interface | |
| - Multi-source search | |
| - Result filtering and sorting | |
| Applicable: Phase 3 | |
| 3. Activity Stream Monitor Widget | |
| Purpose: Live threat activity tracking (Server-Sent Events) | |
| Features: | |
| - Real-time stream display | |
| - Event filtering | |
| - Alert notifications | |
| Applicable: Phase 3 | |
| 4. Health Dashboard Widget | |
| Purpose: System status and dependency monitoring | |
| Features: | |
| - Service health indicators | |
| - Dependency tracking | |
| - Performance metrics | |
| Applicable: Phase 2-3 | |
| 5. Audit Logger Widget | |
| Purpose: Immutable event tracking and compliance reporting | |
| Features: | |
| - Event logging interface | |
| - Compliance report generation | |
| - Audit trail visualization | |
| Applicable: Phase 4 (compliance focus) | |
| ARCHITECTURAL PATTERNS FROM CYBERSTREAMS: | |
| - Data classification system (public, internal, sensitive, PII) | |
| - Mandatory sanitization protocols | |
| - Compliance friction (example: .onion sources disabled by default) | |
| - Railway deployment ready | |
| - MinIO storage integration | |
| SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS: | |
| - Cyberstreams philosophy: Build intentional friction into sensitive capabilities | |
| - Legal approvals required for restricted sources | |
| - DPIA (Data Protection Impact Assessment) documentation | |
| - Audit trail is compliance-ready | |
| WIDGET POTENTIAL: | |
| - "Threat Monitor Widget" - Real-time security feed | |
| - "Compliance Dashboard Widget" - Audit trail and reporting | |
| - "Security Feed Widget" - RSS threat intelligence | |
| - "Activity Stream Widget" - Live security events | |
| INTEGRATION CHALLENGES: | |
| - OpenSearch expertise needed (complex indexing) | |
| - MinIO storage integration | |
| - Security audit required before ship | |
| - Compliance validation (GDPR implications) | |
| - Dark web monitoring (requires legal approval) | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: | |
| Phase 3: 2-3 weeks for basic modules (Feed, Search, Activity) | |
| Phase 4: 1-2 weeks for advanced (Audit Logger, Compliance) | |
| NOTES: | |
| - Positions WidgetBoard in enterprise security space | |
| - Compliance-first approach differentiates from competitors | |
| - Legal friction is feature, not bug | |
| - Consider partnerships with security teams | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-03: AI-Powered Widget Suggestions | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Smart Features | |
| SOURCE: DeepSeek Integration Hub + Phase 1.A Registry | |
| PHASE: Phase 2+ (after AI hub integration) | |
| PRIORITY: Medium | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Use DeepSeek integration to provide intelligent widget suggestions based on | |
| user's dashboard state, recent activity, and usage patterns. | |
| FEATURES: | |
| - Analyze current widgets and layouts | |
| - Suggest complementary widgets | |
| - AI-powered configuration help | |
| - Natural language commands ("show me security alerts") | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - DeepSeek Integration Hub (BACKLOG-01) | |
| - Widget Registry 2.0 (✅ Phase 1.A complete) | |
| - User activity logging | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 3-5 days (Phase 2-3) | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-04: Dark Mode Expansion | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: UX Enhancement | |
| SOURCE: Phase 1.C Design System | |
| PHASE: Phase 2+ | |
| PRIORITY: Medium | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Expand dark mode support beyond basic color variants to include: | |
| - Dark mode-specific optimizations | |
| - Eye-comfort features (reduced blue light option) | |
| - Time-based automatic switching | |
| - Per-widget dark mode preferences | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - Phase 1.C Component Design System (includes dark tokens) | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 2-3 days (Phase 2) | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-05: Multi-Workspace Support | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Advanced Features | |
| SOURCE: Phase 1.B Dashboard Shell | |
| PHASE: Phase 2+ | |
| PRIORITY: Medium | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Enable users to create and switch between multiple workspaces with: | |
| - Separate widget layouts per workspace | |
| - Workspace-specific permissions | |
| - Cross-workspace data sharing (opt-in) | |
| - Workspace templates for different roles | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - Phase 1.B Dashboard Shell (multi-monitor support) | |
| - Widget Registry 2.0 (persistence) | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 1 week (Phase 2-3) | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-06: Widget Marketplace | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Ecosystem | |
| SOURCE: WidgetBoard Architecture | |
| PHASE: Phase 3+ | |
| PRIORITY: Medium | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Community-driven widget marketplace where: | |
| - Developers submit custom widgets | |
| - Users browse and install widgets | |
| - Rating and review system | |
| - Monetization options (free, paid, subscription) | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - Widget Registry 2.0 (discovery + versioning) | |
| - Security audit framework | |
| - Developer documentation | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 2-3 weeks (Phase 3) | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-07: Advanced Performance Profiling Widget | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Developer Tools | |
| SOURCE: Phase 1.A Registry metrics tracking | |
| PHASE: Phase 2+ | |
| PRIORITY: Low | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Developer-focused widget that shows: | |
| - Real-time widget performance metrics | |
| - Memory usage per widget | |
| - Render time analytics | |
| - Performance trends over time | |
| - Bottleneck identification | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - Widget Registry 2.0 metrics system (✅ Phase 1.A) | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 3-5 days (Phase 2) | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-08: Keyboard Shortcuts Manager Widget | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Productivity | |
| SOURCE: Phase 1.B UX enhancements | |
| PHASE: Phase 2+ | |
| PRIORITY: Low | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Widget that allows users to: | |
| - View all available keyboard shortcuts | |
| - Customize shortcuts per widget | |
| - Export/import shortcut profiles | |
| - Search shortcuts | |
| - Create macros (multi-step shortcuts) | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - Phase 1.B keyboard navigation system | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 2-3 days (Phase 2-3) | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-09: API Gateway for Widget Communication | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Architecture | |
| SOURCE: Widget Registry 2.0 + MCP Integration | |
| PHASE: Phase 3+ | |
| PRIORITY: Medium | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Unified API layer that allows: | |
| - Widget-to-widget communication | |
| - Widget-to-backend communication | |
| - Real-time pub/sub between widgets | |
| - Request/response patterns | |
| - Error handling and retry logic | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - Widget Registry 2.0 (communication foundation) | |
| - Phase 1.B collaboration features (real-time updates) | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 1-2 weeks (Phase 3) | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-10: Analytics and Usage Tracking | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Business Intelligence | |
| SOURCE: Phase 1.A Registry + Audit requirements | |
| PHASE: Phase 2+ | |
| PRIORITY: Medium | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Privacy-first analytics system tracking: | |
| - Widget usage patterns | |
| - User engagement metrics | |
| - Feature adoption rates | |
| - Performance insights | |
| - Compliance with GDPR (user consent, data minimization) | |
| NOTES: | |
| - All analytics must be EU-only (data residency) | |
| - User opt-in (GDPR requirement) | |
| - Anonymized by default | |
| - Auditable (who sees what) | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: 1 week (Phase 2-3) | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| BACKLOG MANAGEMENT | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| INTAKE PROCESS: | |
| 1. New idea arrives | |
| 2. Release Manager logs in BACKLOG.txt | |
| 3. Classified: Category, Phase, Priority | |
| 4. Dependencies identified | |
| 5. Rough estimate provided | |
| 6. NOT added to Phase 1 (scope discipline) | |
| PHASE PLANNING PROCESS: | |
| 1. At end of Phase N, review backlog for Phase N+1 | |
| 2. Select items that fit timeline | |
| 3. Estimate detailed effort | |
| 4. Get System Director approval | |
| 5. Move to Phase N+1 specification | |
| PRIORITY SYSTEM: | |
| HIGH: Strategic importance, unlocks other features | |
| MEDIUM: Good to have, enhances product | |
| LOW: Nice to have, can defer | |
| SCOPE DISCIPLINE: | |
| - Nothing in backlog affects Phase 1 | |
| - Phase 1 = Dashboard Shell + Registry 2.0 + Component System (ONLY) | |
| - Backlog items visible but not implemented | |
| - Clear boundary between "current" and "future" | |
| --- | |
| BACKLOG-11: 🚀 10 EARTH-ROCKING INPUTS - WidgetTDC System Architecture Review | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| CATEGORY: Strategic Architecture | |
| SOURCE: System architect comprehensive review | |
| PHASE: Phase 1.C-2 boundary (Dec 16-31, 2025 planning phase) | |
| PRIORITY: CRITICAL (foundation for scale and production readiness) | |
| DESCRIPTION: | |
| Comprehensive architecture review addressing 10 critical system insights: | |
| MCP foundation strategy, multi-service agent patterns, database scaling, | |
| prompt evolution safeguards, authentication/multi-tenancy, vector search | |
| optimization, type safety, WebSocket reliability, testing/observability, | |
| and UI state synchronization. | |
| CRITICAL INSIGHTS: | |
| 1. ⚙️ MCP as Architectural Foundation | |
| - Standardized inter-component messaging layer | |
| - Future-proof widget/service decoupling | |
| - Creates competitive moat through documented API specs | |
| - Action: Formalize MCP contracts as official API specifications | |
| 2. 🧠 Multi-Service AI Agent Architecture | |
| - 5 specialized services need unified orchestration layer | |
| - Risk: Overlapping concerns and duplicated memory management | |
| - Solution: AI Agent Factory + cross-service message broker | |
| - Ownership: Define clear memory persistence responsibility | |
| 3. 💾 SQLite Bottleneck (CRITICAL) | |
| - Current: 11 SQLite tables insufficient for production scale | |
| - Issue: Vector embeddings (10M+) + concurrent writes | |
| - Solution: Dual-write pattern (SQLite dev → PostgreSQL + pgvector prod) | |
| - Timeline: Implement migration tooling before data explosion | |
| - Impact: Blocks production deployment if not addressed | |
| 4. 🔄 Evolution & KPI Monitor - Automatic Prompt Refinement | |
| - Strength: Self-evolving agents (rare capability) | |
| - Risk: Prompt drift without guardrails = quality degradation | |
| - Mitigation: Add Quality Gates (KPI thresholds, A/B testing, rollback) | |
| 5. 🔐 Authentication & Multi-Tenancy (MISSING FOUNDATION) | |
| - Current: No visible auth layer or tenant isolation | |
| - Critical Gap: Have memory/RAG/KPI data but no security boundaries | |
| - Must-Have: JWT/OAuth2 + row-level security + audit logging | |
| - Blocks: Production deployment, enterprise contracts | |
| 6. 📊 SRAG Architecture - Vector Search Latency Trap | |
| - Current: NL → SQL → semantic search = N+1 latency | |
| - Optimization: Cached query plans + query cost estimator + approximate NN | |
| - Expected improvement: 3-5x response time reduction | |
| 7. 🎯 Frontend-Backend Contract - Type Safety Breakthrough | |
| - Strength: Shared TypeScript + MCP interfaces | |
| - Enhancement: Add Zod/io-ts runtime validation | |
| - Add: OpenAPI/GraphQL layer for external consumers | |
| - Add: Version MCP with backward compatibility tests | |
| 8. ⚡ WebSocket Architecture - Real-time Reliability | |
| - Current: WebSocket for widget-service communication | |
| - Gaps: Message ordering, reconnection logic, backpressure? | |
| - Solution: Message queue (Redis/RabbitMQ) + circuit breakers + replay | |
| 9. 🧪 Testing & Observability (BLIND SPOT) | |
| - Current: 15+ widgets + 5 services but missing end-to-end coverage | |
| - Add: E2E tests per AI workflow | |
| - Add: Performance benchmarks | |
| - Add: Distributed tracing (OpenTelemetry) | |
| - Add: Agent decision audit trail (compliance + debugging) | |
| 10. 🎭 UI State Management + AI State Sync | |
| - Risk: Widget state diverges from AI Agent state during long operations | |
| - Solution: Optimistic Updates + Rollback Pattern | |
| - Add: Conflict resolution for concurrent user + AI actions | |
| DEPENDENCIES: | |
| - Phase 1.B complete (Dec 15) | |
| - Phase 1.C component system (Dec 20) | |
| - Phase 1 quality gate passed (Dec 31) | |
| CRITICAL PATH ITEMS (MUST DO): | |
| 🔴 CRITICAL: | |
| - Database migration plan (PostgreSQL + pgvector) | |
| - Multi-tenancy + authentication integration | |
| - Production readiness audit | |
| 🟠 HIGH: | |
| - Message queue + circuit breakers | |
| - End-to-end test suite + observability | |
| - Query optimization for SRAG | |
| 🟡 MEDIUM: | |
| - Prompt evolution guardrails | |
| - WebSocket reliability enhancements | |
| - UI state synchronization patterns | |
| ESTIMATED EFFORT: | |
| Phase 1.C planning: 2-3 days (Dec 25-31) | |
| Phase 2 execution: 3-4 weeks (concurrent with Phase 2.A/B/C) | |
| Impact: Unblocks production deployment + enterprise scaling | |
| NOTES: | |
| - This is NOT Phase 1 work (scope discipline) | |
| - This IS foundation for Phase 2+ success | |
| - Database migration must start before data explosion | |
| - Auth/multi-tenancy prerequisite for production launch | |
| - Observability critical for multi-service debugging | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| BACKLOG SUMMARY | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| Total Backlog Items: 11 | |
| CRITICAL Priority: 1 (System Architecture Review) | |
| High Priority: 2 (DeepSeek Hub, Security Intelligence) | |
| Medium Priority: 7 (Dark Mode, Multi-workspace, Marketplace, etc.) | |
| Low Priority: 1 (Performance Profiling, Shortcuts Manager) | |
| Phase 1 Impact: NONE (scope discipline maintained ✅) | |
| Phase 1.C Planning: Item 11 (architecture planning Dec 25-31) | |
| Phase 2 Execution: Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11 (database + auth + observability) | |
| Phase 3 Candidates: Items 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 | |
| Phase 4 Candidates: Items 2, 6, 9 | |
| Estimated Total Backlog Effort: 8-10 weeks (across Phase 1.C-4) | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| END OF BACKLOG | |
| ================================================================================ | |
| Purpose: Track future work while maintaining Phase 1 scope discipline | |
| Status: Active (items added as ideas surface) | |
| Last Updated: 2025-11-16 18:22 UTC | |
| Next Review: Phase 1 completion (Dec 31, 2025) for Phase 2 planning | |