ADR 0135 supersedes 0133: a module version prepares its state before it runs

Two faults in 0133, both caught on review. It put the declaration on a container — one resource kind
the host applies — so every author would restate the machine's arrangement and a module's own
lifecycle would be tied to how its artifact happens to run. A module declares entrypoints for its
tools and its provisioner; preparing its state is the same vocabulary and nothing about a runtime.

And it derived the scope from the machine, which the facts already answer: a consumer is a module on
a machine (issue 022, migration 0015), so what the mesh provisions is per consumer. A module on three
machines has three databases, there is no shared state to race over, and the lock obligation 0133
invented was for a situation the mesh does not produce. The level question HAL answered with stages
dissolves — the scope of preparation is the scope of the state, and the mesh knows it.

0133 keeps its reasoning and gains a pointer; design 32 and issue 133 name the live record.

04-ISSUES/133-the-control-planes-schema-is-migrated-at-birth-and-never-again/00-report.md

@@ -55,10 +55,11 @@ server starts, which means the old binary briefly runs against the new schema. A
 removes or renames something would break the running control plane in the window between the two.
 
 **A hand-written step is one the next module forgets**, which is why this fix is not where the matter
-ends: [ADR 0133](../../02-DECISIONS/0133-a-module-owns-its-migrations-and-the-mesh-owns-when-they-run.md)
-makes the step derived — a container declares what must run before it, and the mesh composes the gated
-resource — so the control plane stops being the only module that had to remember. The same record
-settles the level question HAL answered with stages, and
+ends: [ADR 0135](../../02-DECISIONS/0135-a-module-version-prepares-its-state-before-it-runs.md) makes it
+derived and puts it where an author works: a module version declares an entrypoint that prepares its
+state, and the mesh composes the gated work from it, so the control plane stops being the only module
+that had to remember. That record also settles the level question HAL answered with stages — a consumer
+is a module on a machine, so the scope of preparation is the scope of the state — and
 [ADR 0134](../../02-DECISIONS/0134-the-mesh-says-what-it-applied.md) answers the second open question
 below: what a machine applied, and what it refused, become facts on the bus rather than a line in a log.