Merge pull request 'Publish-safe: remove two disclosures, and record Nox as the answer to 006' (#3) from chore/publish-safe into main

01-RESEARCH/003-service-supervision/analysis.md

@@ -176,8 +176,8 @@ init — without the recursion.
 
 Worth noting what is *not* in this table: the dozens of `systemctl` call sites that
 configure the **host OS's own** units — NetworkManager, resolved, oomd, zram, docker.service,
-fail2ban, sshd, zfs, across `modules/asusd`, `g14-power`, `wireguard`, `sshd`, `zfs` and
+fail2ban, sshd, zfs, across the vendor-firmware and power modules, `wireguard`, `sshd`, `zfs`
-others. Those are not HAL supervising itself; they are HAL configuring an Arch box. They
+and others. Those are not HAL supervising itself; they are HAL configuring an Arch box. They
 are out of scope for every option above and do not go away under any of them.
 
 ---

02-DECISIONS/0028-hq-is-company-scoped.md

@@ -75,9 +75,9 @@ is the ceremony option 2 was rejected for.
   trigger ([ADR 0025](0025-hq-is-the-source-of-the-constitution.md)): the moment something
   outside the mesh must be governed by the same rules, product-level content moves down a level
   and this repository becomes what its name already claims.
-- A new repository was created rather than the old one transferred — the forge predates the
+- A new repository was created rather than the old one transferred, because the forge predates
-  transfer API. `jschoubben/hq` is left in place untouched; it is not the source of truth and
+  the transfer API. The original was verified to contain nothing the new one lacks — every ref
-  nothing points at it.
+  an ancestor, no tags, issues, pull requests, releases or wiki content — and then removed.
 - The mesh's own documents now live one conceptual level below the repository they are in. A
   reader arriving at `01-RESEARCH` should understand it as the mesh's research, not Novox's.
   Nothing in the folder names says so, and that is the cost of not restructuring.

04-ISSUES/006-hq-is-not-indexed-into-the-knowledge-base/00-report.md

@@ -55,3 +55,36 @@ checked it — including in the same commit that wrote the rule.
   and this content is governed rather than incidental.
 - Public repository, private mesh: the sync direction must not become a path for mesh-specific
   content to arrive **into** these documents.
+
+## Proposed direction — Nox is the search
+
+*Added 2026-08-23.* Rather than syncing these documents into the knowledge base, **Nox
+([ADR 0027](../../02-DECISIONS/0027-the-product-is-novox-mesh.md)) works from within this
+repository and holds its knowledge directly.** Retrieval becomes an agent reading the source,
+not a copy living in a second store.
+
+This is a better answer than the one the README originally promised, on three counts:
+
+- **No sync, so no drift.** The failure mode of a derived copy — the enforced copy winning
+  while the reasoned one quietly stops being true — cannot occur when there is no copy.
+- **It dissolves the original objection properly.** The argument against a separate repository
+  was that it adds a fourth knowledge *system*. An agent with read access adds no store at all.
+- **It is always current**, including for uncommitted work in progress.
+
+**But it changes the promise, and that is worth stating rather than glossing.** ADR 0019's
+answer was that these documents would be returned *beside everything else* in a symptom search.
+An agent that must be **asked** is reachable; it is not surfacing. The two differ in exactly
+the case the operational memory is designed for: someone debugging an error who has no reason
+to think HQ knows anything about it.
+
+So the open question narrows to one thing:
+
+> When a symptom is searched and the answer happens to live in a design document or a decision
+> record here, does the searcher find it without already suspecting it exists?
+
+If Nox is the only path, the answer is no, and the reasoning in ADR 0019 needs amending rather
+than satisfying. If Nox also contributes what it knows to a symptom search — or the search
+consults Nox — the answer is yes and the original promise holds.
+
+That is a design question for Nox, not a defect in this repository, and it should be settled
+before ADR 0019 is treated as answered.