feat: Clarify communication rules and document dependency conflict resolution process for improved stakeholder interactions

vault/06-daily/2026-04-17.md

@@ -45,3 +45,16 @@ tags:
 - David also clarified that Teams and Mattermost represent different social contexts; outside of Jeff, people seen in Teams are generally not the same people David interacts with through Mattermost.
 - David corrected current people status: Norman Arauz and Derian Cordoba no longer work with the current All-Win Software / Mattermost / Slack group, and Erik Reynolds previously worked for Fidelity but no longer does.
 - David clarified an important working-context rule: Jeff is the only person who regularly communicates with Fidelity-side Teams stakeholders, while David works from the All-Win Software side and mainly helps advance the work Jeff needs to report on the Fidelity side.
+
+## Mattermost Refresh - Dependency Conflict
+
+- After XFlowViewMaker was published, David hit a dependency conflict while trying to update Fid4.
+- The conflict appears to come from `FTAccountOpen` and `FTTransfer` depending on XFlowViewMaker with constraints that do not yet allow the new version.
+- David noted that Tauf has handled similar cases before by updating the constraint directly in the podspec repo.
+- Jeff asked David to message Tauf, ask him to remind David what he does in this case, and then document the process for future reference.
+
+## Communication Correction
+
+- David corrected a drafting mistake: when proposing a message that David will send directly to a Fidelity-side contact, the wording must not imply Jeff is the sender or that the recipient already knows David through Jeff.
+- For this kind of direct outreach, avoid phrases like `Jeff mentioned...` unless David explicitly wants that framing.
+- David made a second correction: if Jeff asked for internal documentation or future-process capture, that should stay internal and should not be surfaced in David's external message unless explicitly requested.