0118/130: link ADR 0117 now that it is on main

2026-09-27 00:58:17 +02:00
parent 13208f0f48
commit 248c99ca6c
2 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ undeclare can do. Found reviewing the uplink modules
 - the uplink modules would have stopped the network manager, taking the machine off the only
  link the mesh reaches it by.

-ADR 0117 (in review) answered that for its own modules with a
+[ADR 0117](0117-a-machines-uplink-is-a-seat.md) answered that for its own modules with a
 service declared with no `state`. Every other module that declares a unit it did not make is
 exposed in the same way, and relying on each author to remember an opt-out is how the next one
 is missed.
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ records the state it first found the unit in, and undeclaring returns the unit t
 ## References

 - [issue 130](../04-ISSUES/130-undeclaring-a-service-stops-it/00-report.md): the finding
- ADR 0117 (in review): the uplink modules, and a service with no state
+- [ADR 0117](0117-a-machines-uplink-is-a-seat.md): the uplink modules, and a service with no state
 - [ADR 0102](0102-the-mesh-writes-into-a-shared-file-never-over-it.md), [ADR 0100](0100-a-node-in-use-is-adopted-before-it-is-converged.md):
  what is given back, and how
 - mesh-host `internal/apply/apply.go` (`remove`, the service case)
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ amended-design: 02-DECISIONS/0118-undeclaring-gives-a-unit-back-the-state-it-was

 ## What was observed

-Reviewing the uplink modules (ADR 0117, in review)
+Reviewing the uplink modules ([ADR 0117](../../02-DECISIONS/0117-a-machines-uplink-is-a-seat.md))
 found that the host's `remove` path stops every `service` resource that is no longer declared:
 `SetServiceState(..., "stopped")`, reported as "stopped; the unit file is not the host's to
 delete". `store.Orphans` matches by id alone. So any of these stops the unit: