docs: add Phase 5 design and architectural review documentation

- Add ADR-014: RSS Feed Implementation
- Add ADR-015: Phase 5 Implementation Approach
- Add Phase 5 design documents (RSS and container)
- Add pre-implementation review
- Add RSS and container validation reports
- Add architectural approval for v0.6.0 release

Architecture reviews confirm 98/100 (RSS) and 96/100 (container) scores.
Phase 5 approved for production deployment.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs/decisions/ADR-015-phase-5-implementation-approach.md

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+# ADR-015: Phase 5 Implementation Approach
+
+## Status
+Accepted
+
+## Context
+The development team requested clarification on two implementation decisions for Phase 5:
+1. Version numbering progression from current 0.5.1
+2. Git workflow for implementing Phase 5 features
+
+These decisions needed to be documented to ensure consistent implementation and provide clear guidance for future phases.
+
+## Decision
+
+### Version Numbering
+We will increment the version directly from 0.5.1 to 0.6.0, skipping any intermediate patch versions (e.g., 0.5.2).
+
+### Git Workflow
+We will use a feature branch named `feature/phase-5-rss-container` for all Phase 5 development work.
+
+## Rationale
+
+### Version Numbering Rationale
+1. **Semantic Versioning Compliance**: Phase 5 introduces significant new functionality (RSS feeds and production containerization), which according to semantic versioning warrants a minor version bump (0.5.x → 0.6.0).
+
+2. **Clean Version History**: Jumping directly to 0.6.0 avoids creating intermediate versions that don't represent meaningful release points.
+
+3. **Feature Significance**: RSS feed generation and production containerization are substantial features that justify a full minor version increment.
+
+4. **Project Standards**: This aligns with our versioning strategy documented in `/docs/standards/versioning-strategy.md` where minor versions indicate new features.
+
+### Git Workflow Rationale
+1. **Clean History**: Using a feature branch keeps the main branch stable and provides a clear history of when Phase 5 was integrated.
+
+2. **Easier Rollback**: If issues are discovered, the entire Phase 5 implementation can be rolled back by reverting a single merge commit.
+
+3. **Code Review**: A feature branch enables proper PR review before merging to main, ensuring quality control.
+
+4. **Project Standards**: This follows our git branching strategy for larger features as documented in `/docs/standards/git-branching-strategy.md`.
+
+5. **Testing Isolation**: All Phase 5 work can be tested in isolation before affecting the main branch.
+
+## Consequences
+
+### Positive Consequences
+- Clear version progression that reflects feature significance
+- Clean git history with logical grouping of related commits
+- Ability to review Phase 5 as a cohesive unit
+- Simplified rollback if needed
+- Consistent with project standards
+
+### Negative Consequences
+- Feature branch may diverge from main if Phase 5 takes extended time (mitigated by regular rebasing)
+- No intermediate release points during Phase 5 development
+
+### Neutral Consequences
+- Developers must remember to work on feature branch, not main
+- Version 0.5.2 through 0.5.9 will be skipped in version history
+
+## Alternatives Considered
+
+### Version Numbering Alternatives
+1. **Incremental Patches**: Create 0.5.2 for RSS, 0.5.3 for container, etc.
+   - Rejected: Creates unnecessary version proliferation for work that is part of a single phase
+
+2. **Jump to 1.0.0**: Mark Phase 5 completion as V1 release
+   - Rejected: V1 requires Micropub implementation (Phase 6) per project requirements
+
+### Git Workflow Alternatives
+1. **Direct to Main**: Implement directly on main branch
+   - Rejected: No isolation, harder rollback, messier history
+
+2. **Multiple Feature Branches**: Separate branches for RSS and container
+   - Rejected: These features are part of the same phase and should be reviewed together
+
+3. **Long-lived Development Branch**: Create a `develop` branch
+   - Rejected: Adds unnecessary complexity for a small project
+
+## Implementation Notes
+
+The developer should:
+1. Create feature branch: `git checkout -b feature/phase-5-rss-container`
+2. Update version in `starpunk/__init__.py` from `"0.5.1"` to `"0.6.0"` as first commit
+3. Implement all Phase 5 features on this branch
+4. Create PR when complete for review
+5. Merge to main via PR
+6. Tag release after merge: `git tag -a v0.6.0 -m "Release 0.6.0: RSS feed and production container"`
+
+## References
+- [Versioning Strategy](/home/phil/Projects/starpunk/docs/standards/versioning-strategy.md)
+- [Git Branching Strategy](/home/phil/Projects/starpunk/docs/standards/git-branching-strategy.md)
+- [Phase 5 Design](/home/phil/Projects/starpunk/docs/designs/phase-5-rss-and-container.md)
+- [Phase 5 Quick Reference](/home/phil/Projects/starpunk/docs/designs/phase-5-quick-reference.md)
+
+---
+
+**Date**: 2025-11-19
+**Author**: StarPunk Architect
+**Phase**: 5