What this actually is, and three things that were assumed

Four things settled by talking them through, all of which had been true in
somebody's head and written nowhere.

It is not a mesh in the peer-to-peer sense and will not become one. 0001 now
says what it is instead: machines linked by a private network, one node holding
knowledge of all of them, modules as the way anything is built and delivered,
and agents hired onto nodes to do the work. The word describes what machines
can reach, not how they are governed. "Master" overstates it the other way --
nothing needs that node to keep running, only to change.

0006 gains the option that would make it a real mesh, recorded as considered
rather than rejected by silence: every node holding the whole inventory, a
replication process, an elected master with promotion on failure. What settles
it is not the complexity but that it still would not deliver the name, because
application databases are not replicated -- so a genuine peer-to-peer mesh
means becoming a replicated database system for every consumer's data too. That
is a larger product than the thing it would support.

Also in 0006: three central roles, not one. Losing the control plane costs
change, losing the broker costs being told anything, and losing the hub costs
nodes in different places reaching each other at all -- which is operation, not
administration. Whether they are one node is not decided.

And SSH access is identity's. It appeared three times as something that uses
the overlay and never as something the mesh provides, which reads as settled
when nothing decided it. Nobody else could: the mesh is the only thing that
knows which humans and agents exist and which nodes they may reach. Node to
node SSH stays out -- the host has no inbound control surface by decision, and
nodes reaching each other that way is a second control path through the back
door.

0007 gains the requirement underneath all of it. Reachability was recorded as a
fact to track and never as a thing some node must have. The broker's node and
the hub must be dialable by every node at a stable address, or nothing can join
and a disconnected node cannot return. A mesh entirely behind NAT cannot be
raised. That is a precondition and it belongs with the others.

The link staying on the underlay is also argued now rather than asserted. At
join time it is forced; afterwards it is a choice, and the reason is that a
repair channel carried over the thing being repaired is not one. Moving it onto
the overlay, with fallback, is recorded as open with what it would have to get
right -- a WireGuard interface has no link state to test, and a silent fallback
is this repository's recurring fault in a new place.

0010 says in one line what was the intention throughout: the module system is
the CI/CD. Not a pipeline beside the mesh. Build, test, publish and deploy are
one reconciliation seen at four points, which is why a thing that cannot be a
module cannot be delivered.

02-DECISIONS/0010-delivery.md

@@ -29,6 +29,22 @@ That is the same shape the host uses on a machine, one layer up:
 **This is not the current coordinator repaired.** That is a state machine over stages; the value
 of it here is as a catalogue of the ways this fails, and it has been used for exactly that.
 
+### The module system is the CI/CD
+
+*Written 2026-08-29, because this was the intention throughout and was never stated in one line.*
+
+**There is no pipeline product beside the mesh, and there is not going to be one.** A module
+declares what it is ([ADR 0009](0009-modules-and-the-graph.md)); the control plane notices its
+source is ahead of its artifacts and builds it; the graph says what else that invalidates; the
+node that should run it is told. Build, test, publish and deploy are the same reconciliation seen
+at four points, not four stages wired together.
+
+**Which is why the module system is the core of the setup rather than one component of it.** Every
+other layer is carried by it: the substrate is modules the bundle raises before there is a mesh,
+the control plane is a module, and an application is a module with a different manifest. A thing
+that cannot be expressed as a module cannot be delivered at all — that is a real constraint, and it
+is the one keeping a second delivery mechanism from growing beside this one.
+
 **What disappears is the pipeline as a state machine** — no stage list something can be omitted
 from, which is how a verify stage was built and never scheduled, and no run to lose.