The first amendment left the step table, the review's reading of integration
tests, step 3 and playbook 08 saying the opposite. The run is now once per head
reported, the touched packages and their importers in the module, by name where
the importers are many, and never a whole module or level, within the operator's
rule of 2026-10-18. The live seat list is read again when a head is reported.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KEq4zoDfM9WtYpcQgZ
Issue 1966's fix group showed two gaps in how a developer checks: an integration
test the change broke went unseen because only the untagged suite ran, and a stale
seat list made the local manifest validator refuse what the running one accepts.
The developer definition and playbook 07's develop step now run the touched
packages' integration tests against an embedded bus, the whole of mesh-sdk, and
the validator against the live seat list and a fresh catalog trunk, and stop at
two thirds of the context with a handover in the prepare file. The glossary gains
transport fault (ADR 0664 §1, ADR 0668 §1) and kept call (ADR 0668).
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KEq4zoDfM9WtYpcQgZ
Seams and tools and security and upgrade approved with two fixes: only an
operator's or a healer's rerun clears a failed step for merge-pull, and a
fix before the first registrations is merged by the operator under the
trunk-only want. The review section now records all three rounds.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KK8HD1gufnqyFxMFdW
Seams and tools and security and upgrade asked seven items, ruled by
fix-1965 with ADR 0666 and ADR 0667 staged to match: the assigner and
merge-pull switch on the first registrations, a branch that lost its
protection starts nothing, a passing rerun clears a failed step, sent
objects are read by a grant derived from the manifests, and the object
store is a small mesh-sdk package so nothing else rebuilds. The staged
record renumbered its clauses, so every citation of ADR 0666 follows the
new numbers.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KK8HD1gufnqyFxMFdW
The four reviewers asked changes in every domain and fix-1965 ruled on each,
with ADR 0666 and ADR 0667's wording staged to match: foundation parts keep
old sections, merge-pull judges from its own state so a head merges while
the runner is down, a group's wants wait for group-ended, a failed head is
said to its author then the operator, the checker goes only after a first
end-to-end pipeline and a tested backup, and the stores are sized again for
publish rebuilds.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KK8HD1gufnqyFxMFdW
The assigner's provider rule read the phase of the bus module's newer want,
so a yes not yet asked held every module asking bus state (issue 1966,
note 150); milestone G reads what runs. Also name the tracker of the
review-author stopgap.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KK8HD1gufnqyFxMFdW
Research 086's Domains section names the words its graduation adds and
changes; the designs now use them, so the glossary defines them in the
same set: pipeline, pipeline step, policy, registration, watched branch,
run on request, artifact reference, the seats mesh-pipeline-runner and
mesh-builds, the composition step and the build-input fingerprint, with
Homonyms rows for policy and step. The words that leave (merge check, try,
trunk commit, merge turn, composition check) keep their entries until
milestone G's delivery, since they govern it, and move to Not: lines with
the as-is update after it.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KK8HD1gufnqyFxMFdW
ADR 0666 §6 has the operator-channel offer a fourth ask instead of refusing
it, never holding the newest back; design 46 now says which ask waits and
how it is offered again. ADR 0666 §9 numbers a package when it is
published and has that publication rebuild its dependents; design 51 now
says how the builder numbers it, says it on the seat mesh-builds, and who
asks a tagged version once the checker goes.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KK8HD1gufnqyFxMFdW
ADR 0666 and ADR 0667 decide that a change goes from a commit on a watched
branch to the machines through its module's pipeline, with no Approve per
merge and the checker gone, built and delivered as one milestone with
design 47's milestone G. The design now says how: registrations, the
catalog graph per watched branch, pipeline steps and their policy, a
session's own merge through merge-pull reading the head's latest run,
edges between artifacts, values of any size, the tools, the runner's kept
data and the build capacity, and the acceptance tests by level and
repository. Every section the pipelines replace keeps governing G's own
delivery and says so; the recovery merge points to its decision.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KK8HD1gufnqyFxMFdW
A new step would read as a running put to a reverted assigner, the running-before-assigner order is no
edge of the module graph, put-stands needs a writer that survives a stopped assigner, and the tool
runner's revision rests on ADR 0663, now required before the push beside ADR 0661.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KEq4zoDfM9WtYpcQgZ
The reviewers found the put's end written as built when the recovery reads the have, no end for a put of
the running build, nothing said for a put that stands, two of the eight readers outside the served-verb
order, the readers missing the no-view rule and the candidate case, and a revert's restored modules
unsaid. Each is now written as the lead ruled, with rows in tests 61 and 62.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KEq4zoDfM9WtYpcQgZ
G stops declaring the indexer's modules, so the eight other modules that read it would break unless they
move to the catalog half in the same milestone. A put without hold never ended and pinned its want; ADR
0546 §5 already says it ends once the node runs it, now heard on the node-engine seat's running event.
ADR 0662 decided ADR 0661's switch another way and is withdrawn, so G builds ADR 0661 alone.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KEq4zoDfM9WtYpcQgZ
Without SendMessage, milestone G's developers could report only at their end, so a seat definition the
others wait on could not be handed over mid-way.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JG73KEq4zoDfM9WtYpcQgZ
Round 2 found the pass's running events could age out of a new consumer's reach, the merge bullet still
holding for a carry, the checker's own owed acts unanswered, findings that never cleared, and
kept-artifact open to any module and caller. Each is now written as the lead ruled, with its test row.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFfQ4Z9UE5jK32PmE5
The reviewers found a seat's pass waiting on a call to a node that may be away, acts owed to the forge
that could be lost or done twice, a seat git that missed the gate's and half the parts' forge calls and
events, a merge that still judged a check the operator removed, and waits with no bound or condition.
The design now keeps what each node runs from its running events, makes every owed act safe to repeat
with its outcome said and recorded, gives the seat git every call and event with its act verbs granted
by the holder's callers, orders forge, bridge and gate with a way back, adds module-held and
check-could-not-run, numbers tests 56 to 60, and says how the store seat's holder takes its own build.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFfQ4Z9UE5jK32PmE5
The prepare found the design behind its records and the code: Placement retired by ADR 0641 while the
design still put two seats in a contracts module never made, ADR 0659 and ADR 0660 not followed, the
checker and the forge bridge reading the gate's state, the delivery parts naming the forge module's
tools, and four hand-wired seat-list readers. Design 47 now writes each as the design's choice under the
record it follows; the hold and the merge turns are removed by the operator's word with their record
still to come, and a session's recovery merge waits for one. The glossary moves Placement's words into
Core and Delivery and adds the seat mesh-grants; the words test refuses Placement as a domain heading
(ADR 0641 §5); design 26 takes the new contracts homes and the seat git's verbs.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFfQ4Z9UE5jK32PmE5
The operator, 2026-11-09: a list of requirements shapes the research, so every
option is weighed against requirements the operator has corrected first.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
On 2026-11-09 four watchers in one session ended at their first five-minute report,
leaving waits unwatched while a check, a take-in and an answer were still to come.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
Which module holds a seat is a fact of the mesh's assignments, and a copy
in the glossary drifts (the operator, 2026-11-09: "it shouldn't be in the
glossary"). Each entry keeps its definition and drops the holder; the head
says the holder is read with mesh-module-assigner.assignments and seats.
The words test now refuses a seat held or claimed by a named module; it
failed on twenty statements before they were reworded.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFfQ4Z9UE5jK32PmE5
mesh/check failed: ace: not composed on ace: the composer at the node-engine's trunk 875b4ee5ce38d4bb96089ba3b05962b450… | e01bf97a17f9 on 1fb7943efdb0
Twice on 2026-11-08 a review re-created the indexer's manifest validator without
its seat list and passed a fix the live one still refused (issue 1966); the
operator asked for this line in the same change.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFfQ4Z9UE5jK32PmE5
mesh/check failed: mesh-build-go: the change's manifests cannot be judged: the seat list is not read (the seat list is … | b6b657917ed6 on aaad9daa69bb
mesh/check being carried to ec714857556d on aaad9daa69bb | from 885099eebbbd, mesh-catalog 980ade933853, mesh-delivery 2d201f781ced, mesh-sdk c1b50e99…
B0's first check failed because the running indexer did not know the checker
seat's verb input and the composition took its verdict over the check's own
validator. The operator chose to deliver that verb alone first (2026-11-07).
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
A build module reading the checker's state broke ADR 0596 §2, and no record names the
cycle rule as an exception to ADR 0656 §5; the code now follows both, and so does the
design, with the answer's bound that the build module now enforces.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
The first code review round found the B0 section described the input and answer in the
build seat's objects, no running rule after B0, and a carry's program built at merged heads.
It now says the input is kept in the checker's own state and the answer rides the step key,
names the cycle rule and a failed program's wording as the two exceptions until milestone G
with why, and says where a carry's program is built and when a trunk move asks a new build.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
The begin bound of a run ask, the referenced objects' size, the kept
programs' tools and their 30-day sweep, and the versioned input were left
open by the first amendment; each is now one of B0's choices with its
reason, as ruled, so the developers and the review read one text.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
Row B0 named mesh-delivery-contracts for the ask `run`, but the registry group
creates that module and joins milestone G, after B0; on every trunk before G
the seat's types are mesh-sdk's go/delivery and go/composer, which G's merge
moves (ADR 0634 §4, ADR 0635 §4). The bootstrap section now says every check
runs the checking program (a lone pull request a group of one, a carried
verdict included), that the program makes the heads' seat list, and carries
the seams review's three findings on B0's prepare as the design's own choices
with their reasons: a dropped `run` ask fails by name within a bound, kept
programs have tools and a sweep, and the input goes by reference with a size
bound.
The glossary gains "seat list", used as a term by ADR 0635, ADR 0636 and
design 47 without an entry, retiring "seat set" in hq; four designs take the
word, and issue 299's narrative keeps its day's word by an allowance row.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
At a revert the manifest being applied is the one from before the change,
which names no catch-up tool, so the node agent could not find it there. The
newer build's manifest declares it beside the kept data whose form it changes,
the backup records it in the restore point, and the node agent takes it from
there.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
Round 3 found the revert section left open which kept data G changes, the order
a revert needs, and whether the parts of before can catch up. Read on main, the
indexer catches up from its forge consumer, whose stream keeps only 7 days, so
the restore also runs its existing take-in of every repository; the assigner
keeps nothing to restore and computes the wants again; the gate's start reads
the forge, the pending answers and the source again. The wants keep their form
and are never restored, since that would send nodes to older builds.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
The operator looks only forward, yet wants reverts supported. So the indexer,
the assigner and the gate no longer write the old keys, wants source or merges
and turns beside the new forms, and milestone H goes. A revert is delivered like
any change: ADR 0404's backup covers only the items on a module's node, so the
delivery system gains a restore point of a module's kept data on the bus,
taken before a change of its form and restored beside the live data before a
reverted build starts, after which the part catches up forward; a missing
restore point holds the revert and asks the operator.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
Round 2 found a wait whose holder stopped could go untimed, a node away holding
others' wants, a new field in the want that an old node-engine cannot read,
stores sized for whole revisions, a full store that never cleared, a ledger
sized without its operations, and a kept build a program could rewrite. The
design now says wait-held at a wait's start with its bound, starts each clock
when the new version's build is done, holds a node's wants in the assigner
until that node's new node-engine runs, stores an unchanged entry once, sizes
the ledger from its operations, clears full on room, keeps only builds from a
run step that runs nothing else, names every change of the checking program's
fingerprint, and makes the switch safe to run twice.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
The reviewers found the amendment left the stores to grow without a bound,
the waits without an owner's tools or events, a rollback that would send nodes
back to old builds, a newer indexer that could never be wanted, events any
account could forge, and the node-engine reading every node's placements. The
design now chooses, each with its reason: a default record retention and caps
with fill conditions, a revision removed when no record pins it and it is not
current, waits held and released by each step's own part with their events,
the build module's wait ending on the agreed toolchain, the old keys kept
written until a named milestone H for a rollback, the running indexer making
the newer indexer's entry, rule changes named by the running checker from
outside the sandbox, and subjects and grants that let each part say only its
own. The review verb leaves milestone G for issue 1782, and the watcher's
definition goes back to main, since it contradicted an approved instruction.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
ADR 0656 v6 no longer changes ADR 0493 §5: who may review is another question,
waiting on issue 1782, so the design stops saying the reviewer comes from the
caller's bus account or that the author is refused. Each change ADR 0656 makes
in an earlier record now has its own acceptance test, so the milestone proves
every one of them.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NcbgfFSnn24M3GcqttoU7i
mesh-tools
jschoubben