Issue 114 is answered: the controller is a process, by ADR 0142

It asked a question rather than reporting a defect, and the question was taken
five days later — the mesh's own components are binaries on the machine, and
third-party software stays a container because an image is the right way to
carry somebody else's build. The delivery of them is issue 142.
This commit is contained in:
2026-09-29 22:38:11 +02:00
parent 96bdffa9bc
commit 2b5119ecd2
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
---
status: open
status: resolved
opened: 2026-09-24
located-in: [mesh-controller module.json, mesh-host internal/apply]
fixed-by:
fixed-by: ADR 0142 — the mesh's own components are delivered as binaries on the machine, so the controller is a process; the delivery itself is issue 142
amended-design:
---
@@ -84,3 +84,21 @@ restart and run-to-completion semantics — so this would not need host-side wor
The two do not collapse into one. The controller is not a code-carrying sidecar, and `network: host`
is what makes the asymmetry visible here and nowhere else.
## Answered
*2026-09-29, in a grooming pass.* This asked a question rather than reporting a defect, and the
question was taken: [ADR 0142](../../02-DECISIONS/0142-the-mesh-delivers-its-own-components-as-binaries.md)
decides that the mesh's own components — the host, the controller, the catalogue, the builder, the
vault — are **binaries on the machine**, delivered by the mechanism
[ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) built, and that
third-party software (the store, the registry, the broker) stays a container because an image is the
right way to carry somebody else's build.
So the operating experience this record was written from — every mutating command reached through
`docker exec mesh-controller` — is answered, and answered against the container.
**The delivery is a separate matter and is not this record's.** Step 1 of it is built and no
component travels yet; that is
[issue 142](../142-the-host-is-the-one-thing-the-mesh-does-not-deliver/00-report.md).