Graduate 005; record what 0058 answered in 008

Continuing the sweep. Both were answered by records that did not cite them,
which is the same pattern 003 showed -- an effort stays active because the
decision that resolved it was reached from another direction.

005 graduates. Three of its four questions are answered: provider modules do
not group (0044), the ~50 modules that co-change with nothing stay as they are,
and 'group or leave' was never the right pair -- 0054 reframes it as authority
versus package. Worth noting the debt runs the other way too: this effort's
measurement, that reachability is the ONLY place modules genuinely co-change,
is what 0054 rests on and why connectivity is a context while nothing else
needed one.

Its fourth question moves rather than closes. Whether applications leave the
monorepo before or after they group is a sequencing question, so it belongs to
009-migration.

008 stays active, with its central question marked answered: the coordinator
converges nodes on a declaration rather than dispatching stages (0058). The
three-silo split survives with the third redefined. What 0058 explicitly does
NOT answer is how a change becomes a pipeline reliably -- detection is upstream
of everything it changed and remains the fragile input.

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

@@ -1,11 +1,13 @@
 ---
-status: active
+status: graduated
 initiated: 2026-08-23
 touches:
   - 02-DECISIONS/0017-modules-outside-the-core-are-grouped-by-domain.md
   - 03-DESIGN/00-as-is/10-module-catalogue.md
   - 03-DESIGN/00-as-is/02-modules-and-manifests.md
-became: []
+became:
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0044-a-module-declares-presence-instantiation-and-exclusion.md
+  - 02-DECISIONS/0054-things-that-change-together-share-an-authority.md
 ---
 
 # 005 — Which domains the catalogue groups into
@@ -51,7 +53,31 @@ premise**, in a way that narrows the effort usefully:
 The remaining work is the list itself, for the modules where grouping is justified, plus the
 open questions below.
 
-## Open questions
+## What it became
+
+*Closed 2026-08-28.* Three of the four questions are answered, and by records that did not cite
+this effort — which is why it stayed open after being resolved.
+
+**Whether provider modules group at all** — *no.*
+[ADR 0044](../../02-DECISIONS/0044-a-module-declares-presence-instantiation-and-exclusion.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 0054](../../02-DECISIONS/0054-things-that-change-together-share-an-authority.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.
+
+**What to do with the ~50 modules that co-change with nothing** — *nothing.* They are modules.
+Grouping is a tag and a query over the graph, neither of which anybody keeps true by hand.
+
+**What remains is a sequencing question, not a grouping one**, and it moves rather than closes:
+*whether applications leave the monorepo before or after they group* is
+[research 009](../009-migration/00-overview.md)'s, because it is about how to get from here to
+there rather than about what the shape is.
+
+## Open (superseded by the above) questions
 
 | Question | Why it is open |
 |---|---|

01-RESEARCH/008-delivery-coordinator/00-overview.md

@@ -41,6 +41,25 @@ Research 006 adds a requirement the current design does not have: the coordinato
 **before the mesh is self-hosting**, when source and artifacts come from outside, and keep
 working across the transition to self-hosted providers.
 
+## Answered since
+
+**Does the coordinator dispatch stages, or converge nodes on a declaration?** — *Converge.*
+[ADR 0058](../../02-DECISIONS/0058-delivery-ends-in-a-declaration.md): a pipeline ends when the
+declaration is updated, and deploy stops being once-per-node. The host applies it and reads back,
+so the reporter is the applier — which is what this effort was circling when it asked what a
+*deployed state* is.
+
+**Does the three-silo split survive?** — *Yes, with the third redefined.* Build and publish are
+unchanged; deploy becomes one write rather than a fan-out.
+
+**What is a deployed state?** — *Partly.* "The declaration is updated, and here is which nodes
+have applied it" is the answer 0058 gives, and it makes *outstanding* a first-class result rather
+than a stall. What it does not answer is what a node reports and how, which waits on the link.
+
+**Explicitly NOT answered, and 0058 says so:** *how a change becomes a pipeline, reliably.*
+Detection remains the fragile input — *a merge that created no pipeline, and nothing said so* is
+upstream of everything 0058 changed and is untouched by it.
+
 ## The questions
 
 | Question | Why it matters |