Sloth-ninja gets JessicaOSS ready for a private law-firm pilot

The fork now has a practical route from a promising legal-AI product to a controlled real-world trial.

infrastructureworkflow

Sloth-ninja has prepared JessicaOSS for a small, invite-only pilot with Aria Grace Law solicitors. The product itself is unchanged, but the surrounding work answers the questions that usually stall a pilot: where it runs, who gets access, where documents live, and how the team checks that it is healthy before inviting users in.

A hosted web front end, container-based application service, managed data store, document storage, and domain security setup.
A portable backend package that keeps document-to-PDF conversion available and supports live updates during longer interactions.
Clear participant guidance and a structured feedback form tied to the existing legal workflows.

The team also tested the package locally with placeholder settings, including its health check and restricted runtime permissions.

So what Legal teams considering a private AI trial should care because this turns a fork into something they can evaluate with a small user group before committing to a wider rollout.

View this fork on GitHub →

Spotted something wrong? Or know the PR text has fresher detail than the writeup above?

Commits in this thread

6 commits from Sloth-ninja/JessicaOSS, oldest first. Source extracted verbatim from the harvested git log.

SHA	Subject	Author	Date
`134c1a02`	Add production Dockerfile for backend pilot deployment	sloth-ninja	2026-07-08	↗ GitHub
commit body Multi-stage build (tsc compile, then a slim runtime with libreoffice-writer installed for docxToPdf's soffice dependency, non-root user). Not built or run in this sandbox - no Docker daemon available; verified only by reading backend/src/lib/convert.ts and backend/package.json's build/start scripts. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`793a1d57`	Add pilot deployment guide	sloth-ninja	2026-07-08	↗ GitHub
commit body Covers architecture, backend hosting comparison, production Supabase checklist, R2 setup, full env var matrix, DNS, a post-deploy smoke checklist, and open decisions for the owner. Every repo-verifiable claim (CORS/HSTS/trust-proxy behaviour, LibreOffice invocation, current schema line numbers, existing env var templates) was checked against the actual code rather than assumed; gaps (no wrangler config in the repo yet) are flagged rather than papered over. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`d3b1d110`	Add pilot programme docs and feedback issue form	sloth-ninja	2026-07-08	↗ GitHub
commit body docs/PILOT.md covers the invite-only flow, the synthetic/public-documents- only ground rule pending a data-protection review, what feedback we want, how to give it, expected ~2-week cadence, and the AI-generated/solicitor- review reminder. The GitHub issue form structures feedback (task, outcome, expected result, workflow/template dropdown, severity, UK-terminology flag, optional contact) and was validated with npx yaml-lint (pyyaml unavailable in this sandbox). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`6648d716`	Record WS6 in BUILD_PLAN and BUILD_LOG	sloth-ninja	2026-07-08	↗ GitHub
commit body Appends a WS6 entry to BUILD_PLAN.md §3 (scope + launch-checklist re-sequencing note) without touching anything else in that file, and adds the WS6 entry to the top of BUILD_LOG.md per repo convention. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`3a1513ce`	WS6: match pilot-feedback workflow names to WS4 template titles exactly	sloth-ninja	2026-07-12	↗ GitHub
commit body Code review found two dropdown options that didn't match the WS4 source-of-truth titles (English-law SPA Review; Commercial Lease Review - LTA 1954). Exact-match matters because WS4 also ships plain 'SPA Review' and 'Commercial Lease Review' variants. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01KsUrp6sw58RCSeqJtx5RH6
`acc82f0c`	WS6: avoid duplicating node_modules into a chown layer	sloth-ninja	2026-07-12	↗ GitHub
commit body Replace the trailing 'chown -R node:node /app' (which re-wrote the whole 240 MB npm-ci layer) with per-COPY --chown plus a non-recursive chown of the still-empty /app before USER node - WORKDIR leaves the directory root-owned, so npm ci as node needs it handed over first. Image size 1.5 GB -> 1.21 GB; verified: builds, boots with dummy env, /health ok, runs as node, soffice present. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01KsUrp6sw58RCSeqJtx5RH6

Capture this thread into my fork

Download a single Markdown prompt that tells Claude how to port every commit above into your working tree — adapting paths and structure to match your repo. Run it via claude -p < capture-thread-1204.md from inside the repo you want the changes in.

⬇ Download capture-thread-1204.md