docs: add Phase 5 implementation plan, critical reviews, and summary

- Implementation plan for ContentPublishOperationService extraction
- Two critical review documents with recommendations
- Completion summary documenting all 9 tasks completed

Part of ContentService refactoring Phase 5.

docs/plans/2025-12-23-contentservice-refactor-phase5-implementation-critical-review-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,399 @@
+# Critical Implementation Review: ContentService Refactoring Phase 5
+
+**Plan Under Review:** `docs/plans/2025-12-23-contentservice-refactor-phase5-implementation.md`
+**Review Date:** 2025-12-23
+**Reviewer:** Critical Implementation Review (Automated)
+**Version:** 1
+
+---
+
+## 1. Overall Assessment
+
+**Strengths:**
+- Follows established patterns from Phases 1-4 (ContentServiceBase inheritance, lazy service resolution, field-then-property pattern)
+- Well-documented interface with versioning policy and implementation notes
+- Sensible grouping of related operations (publish, unpublish, schedule, branch)
+- Naming collision with `IContentPublishingService` is explicitly addressed
+- Task breakdown is clear with verification steps and commits
+
+**Major Concerns:**
+1. **Thread safety issue** with `_contentSettings` mutation during `OnChange` callback
+2. **Circular dependency risk** between ContentPublishOperationService and ContentService
+3. **Missing internal method exposure strategy** for `CommitDocumentChangesInternal`
+4. **Incomplete method migration** - some helper methods listed for deletion are still needed by facade
+5. **No cancellation token support** for long-running branch operations
+
+---
+
+## 2. Critical Issues
+
+### 2.1 Thread Safety: ContentSettings Mutation Without Synchronization
+
+**Location:** Task 2, Step 1 - Constructor lines 352-353
+
+```csharp
+_contentSettings = optionsMonitor?.CurrentValue;
+optionsMonitor.OnChange(settings => _contentSettings = settings);
+```
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- If settings change during a multi-culture publish operation, `_contentSettings` could be read mid-operation with inconsistent values
+- This is a **race condition** that could cause intermittent, hard-to-reproduce bugs
+- Same pattern exists in ContentService and has been propagated unchanged
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+```csharp
+private ContentSettings _contentSettings;
+private readonly object _contentSettingsLock = new object();
+
+// In constructor:
+lock (_contentSettingsLock)
+{
+    _contentSettings = optionsMonitor.CurrentValue;
+}
+optionsMonitor.OnChange(settings =>
+{
+    lock (_contentSettingsLock)
+    {
+        _contentSettings = settings;
+    }
+});
+
+// Add thread-safe accessor property:
+private ContentSettings ContentSettings
+{
+    get
+    {
+        lock (_contentSettingsLock)
+        {
+            return _contentSettings;
+        }
+    }
+}
+```
+
+**Priority:** HIGH - Race conditions in publishing can corrupt content state
+
+---
+
+### 2.2 Circular Dependency Risk: GetById Calls
+
+**Location:** Task 2 - IsPathPublishable, GetParent helper methods (lines 758-769)
+
+**Problem:**
+The plan shows `IsPathPublishable` calling `GetById` and `GetParent` which should use `_crudService`. However:
+
+1. Line 804 in current ContentService: `IContent? parent = GetById(content.ParentId);` - this is a ContentService method
+2. The new service needs access to CRUD operations but also needs to avoid circular dependencies
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- If ContentPublishOperationService calls ContentService.GetById, and ContentService delegates to ContentPublishOperationService, you create a runtime circular dependency
+- Lazy resolution can mask this at startup but cause stack overflows at runtime
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+Ensure all content retrieval in ContentPublishOperationService goes through `_crudService`:
+```csharp
+// In IsPathPublishable - use _crudService.GetByIds instead of GetById
+IContent? parent = parentId == Constants.System.Root
+    ? null
+    : _crudService.GetByIds(new[] { content.ParentId }).FirstOrDefault();
+```
+
+Verify `IContentCrudService.GetByIds(int[])` overload exists, or add it.
+
+**Priority:** HIGH - Circular dependencies cause runtime failures
+
+---
+
+### 2.3 Internal Method CommitDocumentChangesInternal Not Exposed
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 477-498
+
+**Problem:**
+`CommitDocumentChangesInternal` is marked as `internal` in the plan but:
+1. It's called from `Publish`, `Unpublish`, and branch operations
+2. It's NOT on the `IContentPublishOperationService` interface
+3. Other services that need to commit document changes (like MoveToRecycleBin) cannot call it
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- `MoveToRecycleBin` in ContentService (the facade) needs to unpublish before moving to bin
+- If `CommitDocumentChangesInternal` is only accessible within ContentPublishOperationService, the facade cannot perform coordinated operations
+- This breaks the "facade orchestrates, services execute" pattern
+
+**Actionable Fix - Two Options:**
+
+**Option A: Add to interface (recommended for testability)**
+```csharp
+// Add to IContentPublishOperationService:
+/// <summary>
+/// Commits pending document publishing/unpublishing changes. Internal use only.
+/// </summary>
+/// <remarks>
+/// This is an advanced API for orchestrating publish operations with other state changes.
+/// Most consumers should use <see cref="Publish"/> or <see cref="Unpublish"/> instead.
+/// </remarks>
+[EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Advanced)]
+PublishResult CommitDocumentChanges(IContent content, int userId = Constants.Security.SuperUserId);
+```
+
+**Option B: Keep MoveToRecycleBin implementation in ContentPublishOperationService**
+- Add `MoveToRecycleBin` to IContentPublishOperationService
+- ContentMoveOperationService.Move stays separate (no unpublish)
+- Facade calls PublishOperationService.MoveToRecycleBin for recycle bin moves
+
+**Priority:** HIGH - Architecture decision needed before implementation
+
+---
+
+### 2.4 Missing Null Check in GetContentSchedulesByIds
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 606-609
+
+```csharp
+public IDictionary<int, IEnumerable<ContentSchedule>> GetContentSchedulesByIds(Guid[] keys)
+{
+    // Copy from ContentService lines 759-783
+}
+```
+
+**Problem:**
+No validation that `keys` is not null or empty. Passing `null` will throw NullReferenceException deep in repository code.
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+```csharp
+public IDictionary<int, IEnumerable<ContentSchedule>> GetContentSchedulesByIds(Guid[] keys)
+{
+    ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(keys);
+    if (keys.Length == 0)
+    {
+        return new Dictionary<int, IEnumerable<ContentSchedule>>();
+    }
+    // ... rest of implementation
+}
+```
+
+**Priority:** MEDIUM - Defensive programming for public API
+
+---
+
+### 2.5 No Cancellation Support for PublishBranch
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 547-566 (PublishBranch methods)
+
+**Problem:**
+`PublishBranch` can process thousands of documents in a single call. There's no `CancellationToken` parameter, meaning:
+1. No way to abort long-running operations
+2. HTTP request timeouts won't stop the operation server-side
+3. Could tie up database connections indefinitely
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- A branch publish on a large site (10,000+ nodes) could take minutes
+- User cancellation, deployment restarts, or timeouts should be respected
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+```csharp
+// Interface:
+IEnumerable<PublishResult> PublishBranch(
+    IContent content,
+    PublishBranchFilter publishBranchFilter,
+    string[] cultures,
+    int userId = Constants.Security.SuperUserId,
+    CancellationToken cancellationToken = default);
+
+// Implementation: check cancellation in loop
+foreach (var descendant in descendants)
+{
+    cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
+    // process...
+}
+```
+
+**Note:** This is a breaking change suggestion. If not feasible now, add a TODO for Phase 8.
+
+**Priority:** MEDIUM - Important for production resilience but not blocking
+
+---
+
+### 2.6 Potential N+1 Query in GetPublishedDescendantsLocked
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 657-660
+
+**Problem:**
+The plan says "Copy from ContentService lines 2279-2301" for `GetPublishedDescendantsLocked`. The current implementation uses path-based queries which are efficient, BUT the helper `HasChildren(int id)` in lines 747-754 makes a separate database call.
+
+Looking at `CommitDocumentChangesInternal` line 1349:
+```csharp
+if (!branchOne && isNew == false && previouslyPublished == false && HasChildren(content.Id))
+```
+
+Then line 1351 calls `GetPublishedDescendantsLocked(content)`.
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- `HasChildren` + `GetPublishedDescendantsLocked` = 2 database round trips
+- For batch operations, this adds up
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+Consider combining into a single query or caching:
+```csharp
+// Instead of:
+if (HasChildren(content.Id))
+{
+    var descendants = GetPublishedDescendantsLocked(content).ToArray();
+    if (descendants.Length > 0) { ... }
+}
+
+// Use:
+var descendants = GetPublishedDescendantsLocked(content).ToArray();
+if (descendants.Length > 0) { ... }
+// HasChildren check is implicit - if no descendants, array is empty
+```
+
+**Priority:** LOW - Micro-optimization, existing code works
+
+---
+
+## 3. Minor Issues & Improvements
+
+### 3.1 Duplicate Helper Methods
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 704-724
+
+`HasUnsavedChanges`, `IsDefaultCulture`, `IsMandatoryCulture`, `GetLanguageDetailsForAuditEntry` are being copied.
+
+**Suggestion:** These are pure utility functions. Consider:
+1. Moving to `ContentServiceBase` as `protected` methods (for all operation services)
+2. Or creating a `ContentServiceHelpers` static class
+
+This avoids duplication if Phase 6/7 services need the same helpers.
+
+---
+
+### 3.2 Magic String in Publish Method
+
+**Location:** Task 2, line 386
+
+```csharp
+cultures.Select(x => x.EnsureCultureCode()!).ToArray();
+```
+
+The `"*"` wildcard is used in multiple places. Consider:
+```csharp
+private const string AllCulturesWildcard = "*";
+```
+
+This makes the code more self-documenting and prevents typos.
+
+---
+
+### 3.3 Inconsistent Null Handling in Interface
+
+**Location:** Task 1, interface definition
+
+- `Unpublish` accepts `string? culture = "*"` (nullable with default)
+- `SendToPublication` accepts `IContent? content` (nullable)
+- `IsPathPublished` accepts `IContent? content` (nullable)
+
+But `Publish` requires non-null `IContent content`.
+
+**Suggestion:** Either all methods should accept nullable content (and return failure result), or none should. Consistency improves API ergonomics.
+
+---
+
+### 3.4 GetPagedDescendants Not Needed
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 728-742
+
+The plan adds a `GetPagedDescendants` helper, but this method already exists in `IContentQueryOperationService` (from Phase 2). Use the injected service instead:
+
+```csharp
+// Instead of new helper:
+// private IEnumerable<IContent> GetPagedDescendants(...)
+
+// Use:
+// QueryOperationService.GetPagedDescendants(...)
+```
+
+However, the new service doesn't have `_queryOperationService` injected. Either:
+1. Add IContentQueryOperationService as a dependency
+2. Or add the method to avoid circular dependency (acceptable duplication)
+
+---
+
+### 3.5 Contract Tests Use NUnit but Plan Says xUnit
+
+**Location:** Task 6, lines 1155-1291
+
+The contract tests use `[TestFixture]` and `[Test]` attributes (NUnit), but the plan header says "xUnit for testing".
+
+**Actionable Fix:** Check project conventions. Looking at existing tests in the repository, they use NUnit. This is correct - update the plan header to say "NUnit".
+
+---
+
+### 3.6 Missing Using Statement in Contract Tests
+
+**Location:** Task 6, line 1156
+
+```csharp
+using NUnit.Framework;
+```
+
+Missing `using Umbraco.Cms.Core` for `Constants.Security.SuperUserId` references in other test files.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Questions for Clarification
+
+### Q1: MoveToRecycleBin Orchestration
+
+The plan states "Keep MoveToRecycleBin in facade (orchestrates unpublish + move)". How exactly will the facade call `CommitDocumentChangesInternal` which is private to ContentPublishOperationService?
+
+**Need:** Architecture decision on internal method exposure (see Critical Issue 2.3)
+
+---
+
+### Q2: GetPublishedDescendants Usage
+
+Line 2101 in Step 9 says "GetPublishedDescendants (internal) - Keep if used by MoveToRecycleBin". Is it used? If so, it needs to be exposed on the interface or kept in ContentService.
+
+**Need:** Verification of callers
+
+---
+
+### Q3: Notification State Propagation
+
+`CommitDocumentChangesInternal` accepts `IDictionary<string, object?>? notificationState`. When delegating from ContentService, how is this state managed?
+
+**Need:** Clarification on how `notificationState` flows through delegation
+
+---
+
+### Q4: Scheduled Publishing Error Handling
+
+What happens if `PerformScheduledPublish` fails mid-batch? Are partial results returned? Is there retry logic in the scheduled job caller?
+
+**Need:** Error handling strategy for scheduled jobs
+
+---
+
+## 5. Final Recommendation
+
+**Recommendation: Approve with Changes**
+
+The plan is well-structured and follows established patterns. However, the following changes are required before implementation:
+
+### Must Fix (Blocking):
+1. **Resolve CommitDocumentChangesInternal exposure** (Critical Issue 2.3) - Architecture decision needed
+2. **Add circular dependency guards** (Critical Issue 2.2) - Verify all GetById calls use _crudService
+3. **Add null checks** for public API methods (Critical Issue 2.4)
+
+### Should Fix (Non-Blocking but Important):
+4. **Thread safety for ContentSettings** (Critical Issue 2.1) - Same issue exists in ContentService, could be addressed separately
+5. **Consider cancellation token** for PublishBranch (Critical Issue 2.5) - Can be added in Phase 8
+
+### Nice to Have:
+6. Consolidate helper methods to avoid duplication
+7. Fix NUnit vs xUnit documentation mismatch
+
+---
+
+**Summary:** The plan is 85% production-ready. The main blocker is clarifying how `CommitDocumentChangesInternal` will be accessible for orchestration in the facade. Once that architecture decision is made, implementation can proceed.

docs/plans/2025-12-23-contentservice-refactor-phase5-implementation-critical-review-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,272 @@
+# Critical Implementation Review: ContentService Refactoring Phase 5
+
+**Plan Under Review:** `docs/plans/2025-12-23-contentservice-refactor-phase5-implementation.md`
+**Review Date:** 2025-12-23
+**Reviewer:** Critical Implementation Review (Automated)
+**Version:** 2
+
+---
+
+## 1. Overall Assessment
+
+**Strengths:**
+- All critical issues from Review 1 have been addressed in the updated plan (v1.1)
+- Thread safety for `ContentSettings` is now properly implemented with lock pattern
+- `CommitDocumentChanges` is exposed on interface with `[EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Advanced)]`
+- Null checks added to `GetContentSchedulesByIds`
+- Explicit failure logging added to `PerformScheduledPublish`
+- Key decisions are clearly documented and rationalized
+- The plan is well-structured with clear verification steps
+
+**Remaining Concerns (Non-Blocking):**
+1. **Misleading comment** in `IsPathPublishable` fix - says "_crudService" but uses `DocumentRepository`
+2. **Nested scope inefficiency** in `IsPathPublishable` calling `GetParent` then `IsPathPublished`
+3. **Helper method duplication** across services (still copying rather than consolidating)
+4. **No idempotency documentation** for `Publish` when content is already published
+5. **Missing error recovery documentation** for `PerformScheduledPublish` partial failures
+
+---
+
+## 2. Critical Issues
+
+**NONE** - All blocking issues from Review 1 have been addressed.
+
+The following issues from Review 1 are now resolved:
+
+| Issue | Resolution in v1.1 |
+|-------|-------------------|
+| 2.1 Thread safety | Lines 356-416: Lock pattern with `_contentSettingsLock` |
+| 2.2 Circular dependency | Lines 751-752, 895-905: Uses `DocumentRepository` directly via base class |
+| 2.3 CommitDocumentChanges exposure | Lines 162-187: Added to interface with `notificationState` parameter |
+| 2.4 Null check | Lines 721-726: Added `ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull` and empty check |
+| 2.5 Cancellation token | Acknowledged as Phase 8 improvement (non-blocking) |
+| 2.6 N+1 query | Low priority, existing pattern acceptable |
+
+---
+
+## 3. Minor Issues & Improvements
+
+### 3.1 Misleading Comment in IsPathPublishable Fix
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 748-752
+
+```csharp
+// Critical Review fix 2.2: Use _crudService to avoid circular dependency
+// Not trashed and has a parent: publishable if the parent is path-published
+IContent? parent = GetParent(content);
+```
+
+**Problem:** The comment says "Use _crudService" but the `GetParent` method actually uses `DocumentRepository.Get()` (lines 903-904). The comment is factually incorrect.
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- Developers reading this code will be confused about the actual implementation
+- Maintenance programmers might incorrectly refactor thinking `_crudService` is used
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+```csharp
+// Avoids circular dependency by using DocumentRepository directly (inherited from ContentServiceBase)
+// rather than calling back into ContentService methods.
+IContent? parent = GetParent(content);
+```
+
+**Priority:** LOW - Code is correct, only documentation issue
+
+---
+
+### 3.2 Nested Scope Inefficiency in IsPathPublishable
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 736-764 and 895-905
+
+**Problem:** `IsPathPublishable` calls `GetParent` which creates a scope, then calls `IsPathPublished` which creates another scope. This results in two separate database transactions for what could be a single operation.
+
+```csharp
+public bool IsPathPublishable(IContent content)
+{
+    // ...
+    IContent? parent = GetParent(content);  // Creates scope 1
+    return parent == null || IsPathPublished(parent);  // Creates scope 2
+}
+```
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- Two separate scopes means two lock acquisitions
+- For deep hierarchies, this could add latency
+- Not a correctness issue, but an efficiency concern
+
+**Actionable Fix (Optional - Not Required):**
+
+Either:
+1. Accept the current implementation (nested scopes are supported, just slightly inefficient)
+2. Or combine into a single scope:
+
+```csharp
+public bool IsPathPublishable(IContent content)
+{
+    if (content.ParentId == Constants.System.Root)
+    {
+        return true;
+    }
+
+    if (content.Trashed)
+    {
+        return false;
+    }
+
+    using ICoreScope scope = ScopeProvider.CreateCoreScope(autoComplete: true);
+    scope.ReadLock(Constants.Locks.ContentTree);
+
+    IContent? parent = content.ParentId == Constants.System.Root
+        ? null
+        : DocumentRepository.Get(content.ParentId);
+
+    return parent == null || DocumentRepository.IsPathPublished(parent);
+}
+```
+
+**Priority:** LOW - Micro-optimization, current implementation works correctly
+
+---
+
+### 3.3 Helper Method Duplication Remains Unaddressed
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 841-859
+
+The following methods are still being duplicated from ContentService:
+- `HasUnsavedChanges` (line 842)
+- `GetLanguageDetailsForAuditEntry` (lines 844-852)
+- `IsDefaultCulture` (lines 855-856)
+- `IsMandatoryCulture` (lines 858-859)
+
+**Suggestion (Non-Blocking):**
+Consider adding these as `protected` methods to `ContentServiceBase` during Phase 8 cleanup, so all operation services can share them:
+
+```csharp
+// In ContentServiceBase:
+protected static bool HasUnsavedChanges(IContent content) =>
+    content.HasIdentity is false || content.IsDirty();
+
+protected static bool IsDefaultCulture(IReadOnlyCollection<ILanguage>? langs, string culture) =>
+    langs?.Any(x => x.IsDefault && x.IsoCode.InvariantEquals(culture)) ?? false;
+```
+
+**Priority:** LOW - Code duplication is acceptable for now, can be consolidated later
+
+---
+
+### 3.4 Publish Idempotency Not Documented
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 429-514
+
+**Problem:** What happens when `Publish` is called on content that is already published with no changes? The method checks `HasUnsavedChanges` but doesn't document the expected behavior for repeat publishes.
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- API consumers might call `Publish` defensively without checking if already published
+- Should this succeed silently, return a specific result type, or be a no-op?
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+Add documentation to the interface method (Task 1):
+
+```csharp
+/// <remarks>
+/// ...
+/// <para>Publishing already-published content with no changes is idempotent and succeeds
+/// without re-triggering notifications or updating timestamps.</para>
+/// </remarks>
+```
+
+**Priority:** LOW - Documentation improvement only
+
+---
+
+### 3.5 PerformScheduledPublish Partial Failure Behavior Undocumented
+
+**Location:** Task 2, lines 591-620
+
+**Observation:** The method now logs failures (excellent improvement from Review 1), but the behavior on partial failure is implicit:
+- Each item is processed independently
+- Failed items are logged and added to results
+- Processing continues for remaining items
+- No transaction rollback occurs
+
+**Why It Matters:**
+- Operators need to understand that failures don't stop the batch
+- Retry logic should be at the caller level (scheduled job service)
+
+**Actionable Fix:**
+Add to the interface documentation (Task 1, line 197):
+
+```csharp
+/// <remarks>
+/// <para>Each document is processed independently. Failures on one document do not prevent
+/// processing of subsequent documents. Partial results are returned including both successes
+/// and failures. Callers should inspect results and implement retry logic as needed.</para>
+/// </remarks>
+```
+
+**Priority:** LOW - Documentation improvement only
+
+---
+
+### 3.6 Contract Test Reflection Signature Match
+
+**Location:** Task 6, lines 1440-1442
+
+```csharp
+var methodInfo = typeof(IContentPublishOperationService).GetMethod(
+    nameof(IContentPublishOperationService.CommitDocumentChanges),
+    new[] { typeof(IContent), typeof(int), typeof(IDictionary<string, object?>) });
+```
+
+**Observation:** The method signature uses nullable reference type `IDictionary<string, object?>?` but the test uses `typeof(IDictionary<string, object?>)`. This works because nullable reference types are compile-time only and don't affect runtime type signatures.
+
+**Status:** No issue - reflection works correctly with nullable reference types.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Questions for Clarification
+
+### Q1: Resolved - CommitDocumentChanges Orchestration
+**From Review 1:** "How will facade call CommitDocumentChangesInternal?"
+**Resolution:** Plan now exposes `CommitDocumentChanges` on interface with `notificationState` parameter (Key Decision #4, #6). MoveToRecycleBin can call `PublishOperationService.CommitDocumentChanges(content, userId, state)`.
+
+### Q2: Resolved - GetPublishedDescendants Usage
+**From Review 1:** "Is GetPublishedDescendants used by MoveToRecycleBin?"
+**Resolution:** Key Decision #5 clarifies that `CommitDocumentChanges` handles descendants internally. The method stays internal to `ContentPublishOperationService`.
+
+### Q3: Resolved - Notification State Propagation
+**From Review 1:** "How is notificationState managed?"
+**Resolution:** Line 169 and 186 show `notificationState` is an optional parameter that can be passed through for orchestrated operations.
+
+### Q4: Clarified - Scheduled Publishing Error Handling
+**From Review 1:** "What happens if PerformScheduledPublish fails mid-batch?"
+**Status:** Lines 599-618 now log failures explicitly. However, the broader behavior (partial results returned, no rollback) could use interface documentation (see Minor Issue 3.5).
+
+---
+
+## 5. Final Recommendation
+
+**Recommendation: Approve**
+
+All critical blocking issues from Review 1 have been properly addressed. The remaining issues are documentation improvements and micro-optimizations that are non-blocking.
+
+### Summary of Changes Since Review 1:
+
+| Category | Changes Applied |
+|----------|-----------------|
+| Thread Safety | Lock pattern for ContentSettings |
+| API Design | CommitDocumentChanges exposed with EditorBrowsable |
+| Error Handling | Null checks and failure logging added |
+| Documentation | Key decisions clarified, test framework corrected |
+| Architecture | Circular dependency concern addressed via DocumentRepository |
+
+### Recommended Actions (Post-Implementation, Non-Blocking):
+
+1. **Minor:** Fix misleading comment in IsPathPublishable (says _crudService, uses DocumentRepository)
+2. **Minor:** Add idempotency documentation to Publish method
+3. **Minor:** Add partial failure documentation to PerformScheduledPublish
+4. **Phase 8:** Consider consolidating helper methods to ContentServiceBase
+5. **Phase 8:** Consider adding CancellationToken support to PublishBranch
+
+---
+
+**The plan is ready for implementation.** Execute via `superpowers:executing-plans` skill.

docs/plans/2025-12-23-contentservice-refactor-phase5-implementation-summary-1.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+# ContentService Refactoring Phase 5: Publish Operation Service Implementation Plan - Completion Summary
+
+## 1. Overview
+
+The original plan aimed to extract all publishing operations (Publish, Unpublish, scheduled publishing, branch publishing, schedule management) from ContentService into a dedicated IContentPublishOperationService. This was identified as the most complex phase of the ContentService refactoring initiative, involving approximately 1,500 lines of publishing logic including complex culture-variant handling, scheduled publishing/expiration, branch publishing with tree traversal, and strategy pattern methods.
+
+**Overall Completion Status:** All 9 tasks have been fully completed and verified. The implementation matches the plan specifications, with all tests passing.
+
+## 2. Completed Items
+
+- **Task 1:** Created `IContentPublishOperationService` interface with 16 public methods covering publishing, unpublishing, scheduled publishing, schedule management, path checks, workflow, and published content queries (commit `0e1d8a3564`)
+- **Task 2:** Implemented `ContentPublishOperationService` class with all publishing operations extracted from ContentService, including thread-safe ContentSettings accessor (commit `26e97dfc81`)
+- **Task 3:** Registered `IContentPublishOperationService` in DI container and updated ContentService factory (commit `392ab5ec87`)
+- **Task 4:** Added `IContentPublishOperationService` injection to ContentService with field, property, and constructor parameter updates; obsolete constructors use lazy resolution (commit `ea4602ec15`)
+- **Task 5:** Delegated all publishing methods from ContentService facade to the new service, removing ~1,500 lines of implementation (commit `6b584497a0`)
+- **Task 6:** Created 12 interface contract tests verifying method signatures, inheritance, and EditorBrowsable attribute (commit `19362eb404`)
+- **Task 7:** Added 4 integration tests for DI resolution, Publish, Unpublish, and IsPathPublishable operations (commit `ab9eb28826`)
+- **Task 8:** Ran full test suite verification:
+  - ContentServiceRefactoringTests: 23 passed
+  - ContentService tests: 220 passed (2 skipped)
+  - Notification tests: 54 passed
+  - Contract tests: 12 passed
+- **Task 9:** Updated design document to mark Phase 5 as complete with revision 1.9 (commit `29837ea348`)
+
+## 3. Partially Completed or Modified Items
+
+None. All items were implemented exactly as specified in the plan.
+
+## 4. Omitted or Deferred Items
+
+- **Git tag `phase-5-publish-extraction`:** The plan specified creating a git tag, but this was not explicitly confirmed in the execution. The tag may have been created but was not verified.
+- **Empty commit for Phase 5 summary:** The plan specified a `git commit --allow-empty` with a Phase 5 summary message, which was not executed as a separate step.
+
+## 5. Discrepancy Explanations
+
+- **Git tag and empty commit:** These were documentation/milestone markers rather than functional requirements. The actual implementation work was fully completed and committed. The design document was updated to reflect Phase 5 completion, which serves the same documentation purpose.
+
+## 6. Key Achievements
+
+- Successfully extracted approximately 1,500 lines of complex publishing logic into a dedicated, focused service
+- Maintained full backward compatibility through the ContentService facade pattern
+- All 309+ tests passing (220 ContentService + 54 Notification + 23 Refactoring + 12 Contract)
+- Implemented critical review recommendations including:
+  - Thread-safe ContentSettings accessor with locking
+  - `CommitDocumentChanges` exposed on interface for facade orchestration (Option A)
+  - Optional `notificationState` parameter for state propagation
+  - Explicit failure logging in `PerformScheduledPublish`
+  - Null/empty check in `GetContentSchedulesByIds`
+- ContentService reduced from approximately 3,000 lines to approximately 1,500 lines
+
+## 7. Final Assessment
+
+The Phase 5 implementation has been completed successfully with full alignment to the original plan specifications. All 9 tasks were executed as documented, with the implementation following established patterns from Phases 1-4. The most complex phase of the ContentService refactoring is now complete, with the publishing logic properly encapsulated in a dedicated service that maintains the same external behavior while improving internal code organization, testability, and maintainability. The comprehensive test coverage (300+ tests passing) provides confidence that the refactoring preserved existing functionality. Minor documentation markers (git tag, empty commit) were omitted but do not affect the functional completeness of the implementation.