Order the records the way the system is learned

Jochen asked whether the order made sense. It did not -- it followed when
things happened to be decided, which after consolidation is fictional anyway
since record 5 alone folds decisions taken across a week.

Concretely wrong before: the domain statement sat at 8, after five engineering
rules; the constitution was scattered across 5, 12 and 17; the tiers landed at
15, 16, 21 and 22 with process records in between.

Now it walks: what the mesh is (1-3), its tiers from the bottom up (4-8), what
runs on them and how it gets there (9-10), how it is built (11-16), how it is
checked (17-18), how we work (19-23).

Two things made this safe rather than free. It is a permutation, not a
compaction, so the renames go through temporary names -- otherwise two files
want one slot and one is lost. And the reference rewrite is a single
simultaneous pass, because almost every number moved into a slot another number
was vacating; replacing one at a time would have cascaded and pointed things at
the wrong record while still resolving.

Verified: 284 [ADR NNNN](path) links across the repository, all with matching
text and target.

The ordering principle is now stated in 19 rather than left implicit -- the
repository already said "the numbering is the flow" about its folders, and
there was no reason for the records to be the exception.

01-RESEARCH/005-domain-grouping/00-overview.md

@@ -2,17 +2,17 @@
 status: graduated
 initiated: 2026-08-23
 touches:
-  - 02-DECISIONS/0019-modules-and-the-graph.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md
   - 03-DESIGN/00-as-is/10-module-catalogue.md
   - 03-DESIGN/00-as-is/02-modules-and-manifests.md
 became:
-  - 02-DECISIONS/0019-modules-and-the-graph.md
-  - 02-DECISIONS/0019-modules-and-the-graph.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md
 ---
 
 # 005 — Which domains the catalogue groups into
 
-[ADR 0019](../../02-DECISIONS/0019-modules-and-the-graph.md) settles
+[ADR 0009](../../02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md) settles
 that modules outside the platform core are grouped by domain rather than by single function,
 and deliberately does not settle the list. This effort settles the list — and, first, tests
 whether the premise survives measurement.
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ together**, measured across the full history of the code repository.
 
 ## Why
 
-The argument in ADR 0017 is that the catalogue's shape records what was installed rather than
+The argument in ADR 0022 is that the catalogue's shape records what was installed rather than
 what anything is for — that four modules constituting "how a node is reachable" have no
 relationship the mesh can see, so a change to connectivity is made four times.
 
@@ -59,12 +59,12 @@ open questions below.
 this effort — which is why it stayed open after being resolved.
 
 **Whether provider modules group at all** — *no.*
-[ADR 0019](../../02-DECISIONS/0019-modules-and-the-graph.md):
+[ADR 0009](../../02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md):
 there is no `networking` thing to install, there are concrete modules named individually. Folders
 assert relationships; edges record them. *Provider* stops being a category at the same time.
 
 **Whether "group or leave" is even the right pair of options** — *it was not*, and that is the
-useful finding. [ADR 0019](../../02-DECISIONS/0019-modules-and-the-graph.md)
+useful finding. [ADR 0009](../../02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md)
 reframes it: things that change together share an **authority**, not a package. This effort's own
 measurement is what that record rests on — reachability being the *only* place modules genuinely
 co-change is why connectivity is a context and why nothing else needed one.