novox/hq
3
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

Consolidate: 65 decision records to 52

Browse Source 
Jochen: a normal application has 3-5 ADRs, maybe 10 for a large one, and we are
at 65. Fair, and the cause is mine -- I recorded every FINDING as a decision
rather than every fork in the road.

Two merges, both cases where one decision had been split across many records
because it was taken over several days rather than at once.

0019 absorbs ten records about how this repository works: what it is and that
it is public, the folder flow, the two design layers, the issue front door,
status in frontmatter, playbooks, the naming rule, the product name. Those were
never ten decisions -- they were one, seen from ten angles as the repository
took shape.

0016 absorbs the five about the lab: a node is a virtual machine, a router is
scenery, a scenario declares the underlay, a scenario is a closed address
space, and the two scenario classes. Same pattern -- one design, split by the
order it was worked out in.

The consolidated 0019 also raises the bar for what earns a record, since that
is what produced 65: a record is warranted when there is a genuine fork -- a
direction reversed, an alternative that will be proposed again, something
contested. A finding is not a decision, and a bug is certainly not. Everything
else belongs in the design document where the reasoning is actually read.

The checker earned its place here. Deleting nine records left 13 dangling links
across the repository and it named every one, including in AGENTS.md. Nothing
was found by reading.

Remaining clusters worth the same treatment: the host (8 records), delivery
(5), modules (6), connectivity (4), substrate and control plane (4). That would
be 52 down to roughly 30.
This commit is contained in:
jschoubben
2026-08-28 18:53:19 +02:00
parent 10365f2eae
commit 5e83ac2c22
48 changed files with 265 additions and 1257 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
03-DESIGN/00-as-is/11-the-lab.md
+5 -5
View File
@@ -4,11 +4,11 @@ status: implemented
code: [mesh-lab]
updated: 2026-08-25
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-a-lab-node-is-a-virtual-machine.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0032-a-scenario-is-an-isolated-address-space.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0033-a-router-is-scenery-not-a-node.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
---
# The lab, as it stands
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/01-end-to-end-testing.md
+5 -5
View File
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@ status: in-progress
code: [mesh-lab]
updated: 2026-08-23
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-a-lab-node-is-a-virtual-machine.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0030-the-repository-structure.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0019-how-this-repository-works.md
---
# End-to-end testing
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ today, that is a gap in the vocabulary rather than a reason to privilege that sh
The design below describes a scenario as a complete mesh — forge (Gitea), coordinator,
delivery cascade — because what it tests is a module. **That is the larger of two classes, and
not the first one built** ([ADR 0029](../../02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md)).
not the first one built** ([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)).
| | **Bootstrap scenario** | **Full scenario** |
|---|---|---|
@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ drifts.
a mesh named by the request instead.
- **Scenarios must be concurrent and cheap.** Several agents working means several scenarios
at once, each needing its own network and nodes. A lab node is a virtual machine
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-a-lab-node-is-a-virtual-machine.md)), and snapshots are
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)), and snapshots are
what make repetition cheap — restoring a scenario costs far less than building one. The
earlier argument here, that only system containers made this affordable, was superseded: the
scale it assumed was invented rather than required.
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/02-scenario-declaration.md
+9 -9
View File
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@ status: in-progress
code: [mesh-lab]
updated: 2026-08-25
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-a-lab-node-is-a-virtual-machine.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
---
# The scenario declaration
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ A scenario is a **declaration of an underlay**, plus what to put on it. It is th
everything in the lab hangs off, so it is worth getting small.
It states what a hosting provider and a home router would provide, and nothing the mesh is
responsible for ([ADR 0031](../../02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md)).
responsible for ([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)).
## Public networks are unrelated, and routed rather than bridged
@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ otherwise explicit declaration, and it exists because NAT has to run somewhere.
It is a **container, not a virtual machine** — a router is scenery rather than something under
test, so the fidelity argument that makes a node a virtual machine does not reach it
([ADR 0033](../../02-DECISIONS/0033-a-router-is-scenery-not-a-node.md)). What a router must
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)). What a router must
reproduce is kernel behaviour, and a container has the same kernel.
**`machines[].at`** — segment and addresses, or a **list** of them for a machine on several
@@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ belongs to a router it does not control, and asleep.
Whether the overlay survives that, re-forms, and is noticed to have changed endpoint is
**observed**, never arranged
([ADR 0031](../../02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md)).
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)).
## Why the addresses are load-bearing
@@ -326,7 +326,7 @@ file: the failure it prevents is silent, so the check has to be loud.
## The same declaration serves both classes
The bootstrap and full scenarios differ **only in `place:`**
([ADR 0029](../../02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md)). Everything
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)). Everything
about the underlay is identical, which is what makes one a strict subset of the other rather
than a fork.
@@ -354,7 +354,7 @@ not first.
## What a scenario deliberately cannot say
- **Overlay addresses, the hub, peer configuration.** Outcomes, not inputs
([ADR 0031](../../02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md)).
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)).
- **What a machine is in mesh terms** — server or workstation, its site, its names. Mesh
configuration, established by the mesh.
- **A host's capability profile.** Detected, never declared.
@@ -543,7 +543,7 @@ cannot yet express.
Nothing here mentions overlay addresses, which node is the hub, who peers with whom, any name,
or any certificate. Research 004 recorded all of those for this topology, and **a scenario must
not state them** ([ADR 0031](../../02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md)): they
not state them** ([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)): they
are what the mesh does, and a scenario that supplied them would be certifying its own work.
The absence is the point. Given the declaration above, whether a hub is elected, whether the
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/03-scenario-lifecycle.md
+6 -6
View File
@@ -4,16 +4,16 @@ status: in-progress
code: [mesh-lab]
updated: 2026-08-25
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0032-a-scenario-is-an-isolated-address-space.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
---
# Scenario lifecycle
The first thing the lab must do, and the only thing it must do before anything else can be
written: **materialise a mesh, return it to a known state, and destroy it**
([ADR 0029](../../02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md)).
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)).
A [declaration](02-scenario-declaration.md) describes a scenario. This describes what happens
to one.
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ The order is not arbitrary — each step needs the one before it to exist:
1. **Segments.** Isolated links, one per declared segment, belonging to this instance and
joined to nothing outside it
([ADR 0032](../../02-DECISIONS/0032-a-scenario-is-an-isolated-address-space.md)).
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)).
2. **Gateways.** Derived, never declared as machines: a gateway is materialised for each
distinct `gateway:` declaration, sitting on both its segment and its parent, carrying the
translation, forwarding and mapping-expiry the declaration asked for.
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ made after it, and returning undoes it like any other change.
## Reaching in
Everything the lab does to a machine goes through the virtualisation layer, never over IP
([ADR 0032](../../02-DECISIONS/0032-a-scenario-is-an-isolated-address-space.md)). `exec` runs a
([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)). `exec` runs a
command on a machine and returns its output.
This has one consequence worth stating plainly: **a reachability question is asked from inside**.
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/04-lab-installation.md
+2 -2
View File
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ status: designed
code: [mesh-lab]
updated: 2026-08-24
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0008-a-failed-step-fails-the-job.md
---
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ decisions:
The lab has prerequisites — a virtualisation daemon, copy-on-write storage, a pool, an identity
permitted to talk to it — and it cannot get them from the mesh, because it is where the mesh is
built ([ADR 0029](../../02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md)).
built ([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)).
So the lab needs an install path of its own. This describes it, and the shape it has to take is
determined by two failures observed while measuring
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/05-the-node-host.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ status: in-progress
code: [mesh-host]
updated: 2026-08-27
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0030-the-repository-structure.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0019-how-this-repository-works.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0036-a-node-is-a-managed-machine.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0037-the-host-applies-it-does-not-decide.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0038-a-node-joins-by-linking-first.md
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/06-the-control-plane.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ updated: 2026-08-27
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0037-the-host-applies-it-does-not-decide.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0053-one-control-plane-and-no-failover.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0030-the-repository-structure.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0019-how-this-repository-works.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0015-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0055-the-control-plane-is-the-node-coordinating-contexts.md
---
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/07-the-substrate.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ status: designed
code: []
updated: 2026-08-27
decisions:
- 02-DECISIONS/0030-the-repository-structure.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0019-how-this-repository-works.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0037-the-host-applies-it-does-not-decide.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0038-a-node-joins-by-linking-first.md
- 02-DECISIONS/0046-the-installer-fetches-what-it-pins.md
03-DESIGN/01-to-be/README.md
+3 -3
View File
@@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ document is written and this one's status becomes `implemented`.
| Document | Covers | Rests on |
|---|---|---|
| [`00-work-breakdown.md`](00-work-breakdown.md) | How the decomposition gets built, in what order, and where a human must look | [ADR 0015](../../02-DECISIONS/0015-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md) |
| [`01-end-to-end-testing.md`](01-end-to-end-testing.md) | The lab: a real mesh a change can be run against before it reaches nodes | [ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-a-lab-node-is-a-virtual-machine.md), [0029](../../02-DECISIONS/0029-the-labs-first-scenario-has-no-pipeline.md) |
| [`02-scenario-declaration.md`](02-scenario-declaration.md) | What a scenario declares — the underlay, and what to place on it | [ADR 0031](../../02-DECISIONS/0031-the-lab-provides-the-underlay.md) |
| [`03-scenario-lifecycle.md`](03-scenario-lifecycle.md) | What happens to a scenario — raise, snapshot, restore, move, destroy | [ADR 0032](../../02-DECISIONS/0032-a-scenario-is-an-isolated-address-space.md) |
| [`01-end-to-end-testing.md`](01-end-to-end-testing.md) | The lab: a real mesh a change can be run against before it reaches nodes | [ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md), [0029](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md) |
| [`02-scenario-declaration.md`](02-scenario-declaration.md) | What a scenario declares — the underlay, and what to place on it | [ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md) |
| [`03-scenario-lifecycle.md`](03-scenario-lifecycle.md) | What happens to a scenario — raise, snapshot, restore, move, destroy | [ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md) |
| [`04-lab-installation.md`](04-lab-installation.md) | Getting the lab onto a clean machine, and why it verifies capability rather than installation | [ADR 0008](../../02-DECISIONS/0008-a-failed-step-fails-the-job.md) |
| [`05-the-node-host.md`](05-the-node-host.md) | Tier 0 — the one thing installed by hand, and the only thing that changes a machine | [ADR 0037](../../02-DECISIONS/0037-the-host-applies-it-does-not-decide.md) |
| [`06-the-control-plane.md`](06-the-control-plane.md) | Tier 2 — what the term means, and the test for what belongs in it | [ADR 0037](../../02-DECISIONS/0037-the-host-applies-it-does-not-decide.md) |