Commit Graph
72 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
jochen 478a198e9a ADR 0247: a machine with a VPN client routes names by domain, through a resolver of its own
mesh/merge-gate pass: the change touches no module of the mesh's graph
mesh/repo-check pass: its merge-check.sh passed
mesh/delivery superseded: a newer head of the same pull request
Research 033 measured the laptop's VPN client and the mesh overwriting each
other's resolver file in nine of nine sessions, each time cutting off one
kind of name. The operator chose a resolver module on a node seat of its
own, installed only where something requires split-dns, with the VPN
client's module carrying the adapter. Graduates research 033 into to-be 50,
and amends connectivity §2, to-be 48 §10, the seats and the glossary.
2026-10-07 21:33:48 +02:00
mesh-admin 0bd12fc777 Merge pull request 'Issue 298 and ADR 0246: a seat's new verb is promised before it is required' (#178) from issues/298-a-new-seat-verb-deadlocks into main 2026-10-07 19:21:52 +00:00
jochen 4b36234c9b Reword the hosts file in to-be 36, found by the plural on the rebase onto main
mesh/merge-gate pass: the change touches no module of the mesh's graph
mesh/repo-check pass: its merge-check.sh passed
mesh/delivery delivered
mesh/delivery-group group fix/words-match-plurals delivered: every member is delivered
2026-10-07 21:14:43 +02:00
jochen 350f7dcdc2 Hold a retired word's plural to the word, so alerts and rollouts no longer pass
words.py matched a retired word only when nothing followed it, so the
plural of every retired word passed. The pattern now takes s or es on the
last word; 14 uses in 9 documents are reworded, two of them 'the hosts'
for the node-engines.
2026-10-07 21:14:36 +02:00
jochen e6a17b8bf6 Issue 298 and ADR 0246: a seat's new verb is promised before it is required
mesh/merge-gate pass: the change touches no module of the mesh's graph
mesh/repo-check pass: its merge-check.sh passed
mesh/delivery superseded: a newer head of the same pull request
Design 33 said a seat's verbs change additively, and section 3 made each
one a condition of holding, so a verb added in the controller and served
from the catalogue could land in neither order. It happened three times on
2026-10-07. Section 7 now says the three steps and how each is checked.
2026-10-07 21:14:20 +02:00
jochen 008014591b Do not track the word check's compiled cache
mesh/merge-gate pass: the change touches no module of the mesh's graph
mesh/repo-check pass: its merge-check.sh passed
mesh/delivery delivered
2026-10-07 20:07:33 +02:00
jochen 051696e107 Retire "the host" in hq prose only: in the tools it is also an SSH server's word
mesh/merge-gate pass: the change touches no module of the mesh's graph
mesh/repo-check pass: its merge-check.sh passed
mesh/delivery superseded: a newer head of the same pull request
2026-10-07 20:02:03 +02:00
jochen a28da1734b Graduate research 034: the mesh in domains, one word per thing, checked
ADR 0244 sorts the mesh's concepts into ten domains (ADR 0006's contexts
carry over as domains), keeps machine and node as distinct words, and
makes the glossary the authority with every retired word on its
replacement's Not: line. To-be 49 draws the domains; the glossary is
reorganised by them, its two contradictions removed and the missing
words added. words.py now fails on a retired word in running prose and
on a word defined twice, so the rule is enforced rather than believed;
the 63 documents it failed on are reworded here, and research 034 is
kept as the record of the words it studied.
2026-10-07 19:58:39 +02:00
jochen 16b187d4c3 ADR 0239: a delivery is owned by mesh-delivery and runs from commit to delivered
mesh/delivery superseded: a newer head of the same pull request
mesh/merge-gate pass: the change touches no module of the mesh's graph
One owner for one commit's journey, so 'did my change go out' is answered by
one module instead of five records joined by hand; delivery groups make the
cross-repository order the mesh enforces instead of the person merging.
2026-10-06 23:18:31 +02:00
jochen d245df7dea ADR 0237, to-be 45 Phase 5: a change is judged against the mesh that runs before it merges
The operator approved Phase 5. Decides what the design left open: the build seat runs the
merge check, the facts live in the artifact store, the merge gate composes the mesh as it is
and with the change and judges only what the change adds, a replay lives where its incident
is, and the controller's tests run a bus of their own at the mesh's release. A core issue now
resolves only with a replay or a stated reason, checked by cycle.py.
2026-10-06 21:10:54 +02:00
jochen 54fe510b54 ADR 0234, to-be 46: decide factor recovery, addressing, references and who is the operator
The operator found four gaps that would bite on first use: a lost phone
locked the mesh's only person out, an operator message had no addressee,
asks could not name the specifics they need, and the operator was a
holder's flag. Each is now a rule with its check and its build phase.
2026-10-06 16:58:59 +02:00
jochen fb30b75f20 ADR 0234, to-be 46: let the operator answer, and let only the controller act on an answer
Research 028 graduates: the mesh needs to ask as well as tell, over
channels that are seats rather than code inside one notifier, and an
action a person must approve cannot rest on a desk click an agent can
forge. TOTP verified by the controller is the proof; a key stays optional.
Amends to-be 45 section 5 as ADR 0227 left it to.
2026-10-06 16:39:11 +02:00
jochen 4f1300fd48 ADR 0223: the mesh has two resolvers, and a machine lists only them
musl asks every listed nameserver at once and takes the first reply, so ADR
0196's public fallback answered NXDOMAIN for mesh names in every Alpine build
on the home server. Decide two mesh resolvers and no public line now; record
resolv.conf moving to the uplink's holder and /etc/hosts with /etc/hostname
moving to one hostname seat as the next steps. Amend to-be 08 and 26.
2026-10-05 22:43:18 +02:00
jochen eb7356360f Glossary: the node-engine, the program every node runs, replaces "host agent" and mesh-host 2026-10-05 22:31:13 +02:00
jochen e4f80cc3ce ADR 0207: a module depends on the node seats that apply its resources
A service needs node-service-manager held on its node, a package
node-package-manager, a container node-container-runtime: derived from the
resources, never stated; refused at assign, reported at composition until the
three holders are on every node. Glossary: depends on a seat; nothing claims a
package.
2026-10-04 12:21:24 +02:00
jschoubben da8b4b4ee4 Renumber to ADR 0188: 0187 landed on main first, as the dead-tracker record
Two records shared 0187 (issue 155's collision); the branch landing last
renumbers, and this is it. Only the number changes.
2026-10-02 21:01:02 +02:00
jochen 709240ec1f ADR 0187: a module's own code is bundles in any language, and a tools bundle speaks MCP to the runtime; design 38 gains WP1b
The operator's direction, absent from every record until now: the SDK must not limit who writes a
module; tools and services may be written in any language; one module may ship several bundles
(tools, a seat's implementation, a daemon); skeleton first, a full implementation when the work
requires it. ADR 0175 had the runtime import a bundle, which only JavaScript can be.

0187 makes a tools bundle a process the node's runtime launches and speaks MCP over stdio to —
the vocabulary the runtime already speaks outward — so any language with an MCP library can write
one today and the mesh's SDK per language is thin; the transport stays in the runtime (0039's
refusal, kept). Importing a TypeScript bundle is the shortcut, not the contract. Notes in 0175,
0039 and 0150 say where their mechanism moved; design 38 records WP1 as built and adds WP1b (the
launcher and the skeleton SDKs); the glossary's bundle widens.
2026-10-02 18:56:57 +02:00
jochen 7b1dabbce0 The operator's agent and its licence manager are modules: ADR 0181–0183, to-be 36 and 39
The predecessor's agent module was retired and its six files stayed on both workstations telling
every session to use tools that no longer exist. This is its successor's design, revised during
review on the operator's directions: the host is module-agnostic, the controller has no part, and a
real licence manager hands out the correct licence in every situation.

- ADR 0181 (reconstructed): the operator account is a node fact stated by the operator; the home is
  derived unless stated; a resource may be placed under it owned by the account; a node with no
  account refuses one. What the controller shipped on 2026-09-27 without a record.
- ADR 0182: inside a home the module owns the directory and the files it places, writes into the
  tool's own files for its few keys, never declares a credential's content, and holds everything
  else as found; a predecessor's leftovers are the operator's to remove once.
- ADR 0183: claude-licence-manager holds the mesh seat anthropic-licence-manager and owns the
  Anthropic licences, grants (encrypted with a key the vault made for it), bindings per touchpoint,
  usage and audit; one rotation source under a lease; a token travels module to module sealed to
  each node's module key on request/reply, never as an event; the agent module alone writes what
  the agent reads; the host delivers package and state and knows nothing else. A bounded exception
  to ADR 0113; dated mechanism notes on ADR 0050 and 0113.
- To-be 36 (claude-code): the mesh's part of the agent's configuration lives in the agent's
  machine-wide managed directory, owned whole by the module and written by its code; nothing under
  the home but the credentials file of a subscription licence; the API-key licence through the
  key-helper; the console as a node-scoped provision (to-be 34 amended); MCP servers as settings
  with an mcp_configure tool; one agent directory per machine shared by every session.
- To-be 39 (claude-licence-manager): store, the two licence kinds, keeping a grant alive, the
  hand-over, who gets which licence with the predecessor's fallbacks, adoption with the identity
  guard, the seat's verbs.

Numbers taken across main and every open branch at the time of the merge; to-be 14, 29 and 34
carry dated notes; the glossary gains "operator account".
2026-10-02 17:22:12 +02:00
jochen bf39baf104 Research 018 graduates: ADRs 0173–0177 and to-be 37, the operator's machine
Every configurable thing on a node is a module, the home included, and a
module is whatever it declares (0173, extending 0040). A node varies a module
only through a setting rendered into the file or a kept region, never an edit
(0174, extending 0011; issue 168 first). One tool runtime per node serves every
module's tools on the host side, never in a container; the console is its
serving mode, renamed node-tools (0175, extending 0150; 0047/0150/0152 carry
dated notes). The login shell is a node seat held by one shell module with
`execute` as its contract (0176). A unit may be user-scoped and the service
manager is a node seat held by systemd (0177).

To-be 37 is handed off in-progress to mesh-host, mesh-controller, mesh-tools
and mesh-catalog, with the build in order: the account on every node, the
runtime, zsh, systemd, then the graphical stack. To-be 29 keeps ~/.ssh and
points at 37; 33 §6 and 34 are amended; the glossary gains node tools, bundle,
kept region, installed/holding, and retires flavor.
2026-10-02 16:34:57 +02:00
jschoubben 98eb3aa76f ADR 0169 → 0170: the firewall seat's record renumbered after a collision on main; its built note; cycle.py refuses two records sharing a number
Another session's 0169 landed first. The collision check from issue 155
covered issue folders only; it covers decision records now, and would have
refused this.
2026-10-02 14:51:22 +02:00
jschoubben 22a28ad548 ADR 0156: an artifact is what a build produces, and the store's seat is named for its scope
Issue 123 resolved; glossary corrected; design 26 and ADR 0121 point at the rename.
2026-09-30 21:14:40 +02:00
jschoubben ad4a5ea004 ADR 0152: the operator's surface is a module, the console
The work order's group-3 question answered: an ordinary module the mesh assigns to the machine a
person sits at, holding a minted credential, calling tools under a manifest grant (invokes), serving
MCP on loopback. Design 34; pointers in 33, 25 and 0095; module check designed into 12 (issue 148);
README stops claiming an indexing nothing provides (issue 006).
2026-09-30 16:08:52 +02:00
jschoubben 47909c6b71 The records pointed at branches that no longer exist, and two fixes had no sequel
Three issues named the branch that fixed them, and a branch is deleted
when it merges — so every `fixed-by:` was a pointer that resolved to
nothing by the time anyone followed it. They name commits and pull
requests now, and playbook 03 says to.

Two records were missing the thing a reader arrives for. 146 did not say
that one of its fixes crash-looped the control plane on a running mesh,
which is the whole reason the delivery subject carries the stream and the
raise path was the only one exercised. 151 did not say that 152 removed
the false reasons its roster moved, or that it stays open for the real
ones.

ADR 0080 enumerates what cycle.py enforces and named four things; it
enforces five. A progressive insight names the fifth — the decision
stands, the list had gone stale. The checks README and playbook 03 gained
the same rule, and 155 points at all three.
2026-09-30 00:28:35 +02:00
jschoubben b967ef7be3 Two records shared a number, twice, and every check passed
Two machines filing issues in the same hour both read main correctly and
both took "the next free number". main lags every open pull request —
seven that evening — so they collided twice. The second collision
reached main with records, cycle and index all reporting success.

cycle.py now refuses a tree where two issue folders share a leading
number, and names both. Proven by adding a duplicate and watching it
fail. The colliding records become 153 and 154, renumbered in the branch
that lands last, because renumbering a branch whose author is still
pushing only moves the race.

The check catches a collision; it does not prevent one. Taking a number
still means reading the open pull requests as well as main — issue 155
says so.
2026-09-29 23:38:48 +02:00
jschoubben 1aeb4fe8d8 ADR 0140: the filter constrains what arrives from outside, and says nothing about a machine's own guests
Reading a converged machine's rendered rules showed the cause: the chain blocks
everything passing through and then allows the machine's own containers back by
listing their address ranges. 0137 made that list typeable and 0139 tried to
generate it; both refined a list that should not exist, because the mesh has no
position on a container reaching outward. Constrain what arrives from outside,
allow what did not, and let the machine report which links face outside — one
fact instead of a list. Ports keep following the modules unchanged.

The records check now allows one record to supersede several, and stops
requiring a withdrawn record's own citations to be live.
2026-09-28 23:31:50 +02:00
jschoubben 784b487bf9 ADR 0131: everything on the mesh speaks to the broker seat, and AMQP is not a provision
Taken during the outage of 2026-09-27, when the protocol leaked into the seat's
contract: to hold mesh-broker a module had to provide amqp, so the module that
will carry the bus could not hold the seat that names the bus, while the module
being retired could. Supersedes 0127. Modules depend on the seat and reach the
bus through the sdk; no manifest provides or requires amqp; the old broker's
module and the two modules that required it leave the catalogue; the AMQP
transport is deleted once every node reports on the new bus.

Design 28 step 5 rewritten under it: the seat handover becomes its own task and
is built first, because the seat the control plane dereferences cannot be empty
in between — that emptiness was the outage. The cost note now carries what was
measured rather than what was assumed.

0128 and 0130 extended 0127; each now rests on 0131 with a dated note and
changes nothing it decided. Every other citation of 0127 names its replacement.
records.py still fails on 0120/0112, which predates this branch.
2026-09-27 23:03:05 +02:00
jschoubben ce6ae943b7 Merge main: renumber this branch's records around the trunk's
Both lines of work numbered from the same point, so four decision records and one design
document existed twice with different content. The trunk keeps its numbers and this branch
yields — the only rule that scales, because the trunk's are already cited by what merged
before them.

  0117 the bus is the only broker        -> 0125
  0118 a module declares its own seats   -> 0126
  0119 amqp is a provision, not the bus  -> 0127
  0120 the mesh bus is required          -> 0128
  0123 a seat carries its role's protocol -> 0129
  0124 the predecessor is ending          -> 0130
  design 29, what a module declares       -> design 32

Applied to the code repositories too, because a stale reference is worse when numbers
collide than when they dangle: the reader lands on a real record that decided something
else.

Two reconciliations the merge forced, both real:

**0110 was marked wholly superseded and was not.** Its successor says in as many words that
everything 0110 decided about what a seat *is* stands untouched — and two records that
landed on the trunk rest on exactly that part. So it is accepted again, extended rather than
replaced, with a note saying which of its claims moved and where.

**A seat's protocol becomes columns, not fields.** The trunk moved the seat set out of
compiled code into a table the controller owns. This branch had added what a role accepts,
emits and serves to the Go slice. The decision is unaffected and the mechanism is better for
it: giving a role a protocol is now a write rather than a rebuild, which is the trunk's own
argument applied to what this branch added.

One check still fails and it fails on main too: a record resting on ADR 0112 while that is
still 'proposed'. Left alone — it is not this merge's to answer.
2026-09-27 18:23:41 +02:00
jschoubben 9f6aa7ea9c The bus is the mesh's centre, not a transport that replaced one
Two things. A paragraph from the superseded 0117 survived beside the 0119
correction that reversed it, so §5 said both that the amqp interface
retires and that it does not. The stale one is gone.

And the framing. §1 opened with "the bus carries five kinds of traffic
today, and this design keeps the five", with a column mapping each to the
queue it used to be — which describes the mesh's nervous system as a port
of something that did a fraction of this. It now says what the bus is: a
role addressable without knowing its holder, the mesh's own state, work
that queues until somebody can do it, and permissions derived from what a
module declared. Conditions, observation and a person's client land there
too as they are built.

Glossary gains `bus` and `the deprecated broker`, with a note on why not to
say "compatibility broker" or name it after a protocol — the second invites
exactly the backwards framing this commit removes.
2026-09-26 23:54:09 +02:00
jschoubben 85f972749a AMQP is a provision, not the bus
0117 went a step further than it had grounds for. It was right that the bus
is the only bus, and wrong that the amqp interface must therefore retire —
because it conflated two reasons to want a broker. Using one to reach
another module is a second bus and stays refused. Needing an AMQP broker as
a backing service, the way something needs a database, is ordinary, and
forbidding it would make the mesh unable to run normal software while
calling that architecture.

So the broker becomes a plain provider module: no seat, not foundation,
never raised at genesis, no retirement condition. lavinmq now claims nothing
and provides amqp; nats claims mesh-broker and provides nothing.

The rule that survives is about direction, not software: inter-module
communication goes over the bus. A module may hold a broker for itself; it
may not use one as a channel to another module. That is a review judgement
where 0117 could have used a parser, which is the honest cost.

0106's progressive insight was itself wrong and is corrected by a second one
there — nothing moves off the old broker, so its "one purpose" sentence does
not become true, it is just not what that server is.

The insight check needed two fixes it found itself: a date may carry
trailing words, and a bold run with a link is discussing an insight rather
than marking one. All four bad shapes still fire.
2026-09-26 21:08:40 +02:00
jschoubben 7b4916e9ec Modules declare their own seats; the mesh reserves mesh-*
The architecture 0117 opened needs a module to offer a service as a role on
the bus — one holder, addressed by what it does. A closed table in the
controller cannot express that: a capability a module contributes would
require changing the mesh itself.

But 0110 closed the set for a good reason — nothing could say what seats a
mesh had, and the hand count came out at eleven of thirteen. That argues for
enumerable, not hardcoded, and 0110 weighed free-form against a fixed table
without considering a third option: closed at any moment and derived from
the catalogue. A derived list cannot drift, which is how the count broke.

So: the mesh's seats stay the mesh's, reserved by the mesh- prefix so the
prefix is the rule and there is no list to maintain; ten seats are renamed
to restore 0079's convention; everything 0110 decided about what a seat IS
survives untouched.

Design 29 carries the declaration model: three namespaces, subjects derived
from local names so a manifest survives the wire changing, queues never
declared, five relationships (the job and state shapes 0041 had no room
for), and the build-publish-deploy lifecycle with hard, soft and build-time
dependencies distinguished.

0041 gets a progressive insight: "no per-consumer setup, only a
subscription" was a fact about a topic exchange, and a JetStream durable
consumer is a real object someone creates.

WBS 1.3/1.4 were wrong and say so: streams come at registration and
consumers at assignment, so only the foundation set belongs at genesis.
2026-09-26 20:34:32 +02:00
jschoubben 814c9e563f The bus is the only broker; step 1 starts
A module does declare requirements the provisioner fulfils — but the broker
it gets that way is a private vhost, the analog of a database, not the
mesh's bus. Two modules of the new mesh depend on it, so the compatibility
broker was never single-purpose and its retirement would have stranded them.

NATS is the heart: one bus, a module's messaging is subjects on it scoped by
what it declares, and no module is handed a server of its own. The seat
delivers nothing; the interface retires with the broker. Also closes the
EVENTS question — one stream, on the bootstrap argument, not preference.

Designs 25 and 28 go in-progress: step 1 is starting.

The insight check caught a false positive on its own first real use — its
bold-run pattern crossed newlines and joined an unrelated `**` to the
marker. Constrained to one line, still catching all four bad shapes.
2026-09-26 19:26:07 +02:00
jschoubben 1c808898a5 Allow progressive insight, and apply two to the bus record
A record can assert a fact that goes stale while the decision it supports
stays right. Superseding for that buries a sound record under a second one
and makes every reader work out which is live. So a correction of fact is
now made in place, marked and dated, with the old wording quoted — bounded
by three conditions and checked by records.py, which fires on an unmarked,
undated or back-dated note. Judgements still supersede.

Applied to 0115: no conformance suite exists to recapture, and the full
genesis bed cannot run until the links exist. Designs 25 and 28 follow.
2026-09-26 18:39:38 +02:00
jochen a7b2db9efc Accept ADR 0110 and ADR 0111; the seats design is in progress
The seats half of to-be 27's review is settled, so the two records it rests on are accepted and
the vocabulary catches up: the glossary's *seat* becomes a named role from a closed set, held by
an assignment and possibly delivering a provision, and 23 — Choosing a provider gains the seat
step in resolution, with ambiguity still refused rather than guessed. Both were held back when
0110 was proposed, because a document may not rest on a record that is not accepted.

26 — The seats moves to in-progress rather than designed: it names the files that implement it,
and naming a file claims implementation, which is only defensible once those files are on the
owning repositories' main branches. It becomes implemented when mesh-controller #63 and
mesh-catalog #69 land.

0112, 0113 and 0114 stay proposed; to-be 27 stays proposed with them.
2026-09-26 14:28:23 +02:00
jschoubben 545d038198 Name the migration repository in the map, so nobody has to be told it exists
hq cannot hold the migration's operational record — it names machines, addresses and
paths, and this repository is public — but it can say where that record is, which is what
this map is for. Asked for by the operator, who had to be told.
2026-09-24 02:01:41 +02:00
jschoubben 36d9b38a0d An issue is open, diagnosing, located, resolved or wontfix — nothing else
The playbook, the README and the status skill knew five statuses; the cycle check
knew a sixth, 'fixed', and not 'wontfix'. Eleven issues sat in the sixth for weeks
with their fixes shipped, one step short of closed. They are resolved; the check
refuses the word from now on and accepts the one the playbook allows.
2026-09-21 17:38:17 +02:00
jschoubben 61f61b5d06 Reconcile the open issues against main
An audit of the six code repositories found eleven open issues fixed on main
with commits and beds to show (025, 027, 033, 036, 037, 040, 045, 047, 050,
052, 053), three partly (007, 026, 035), nine not (020, 031, 041, 046, 049,
054, 064, 065, 066) and one whose fix would live outside those repos (006).
Resolved ones name their evidence; partly ones say what remains; 041 records
that the exposure has widened since it was reported.
2026-09-21 01:52:53 +02:00
jschoubben 050a2d08e8 Playbook 07: a feature worktree needs the siblings the lab reads
A bed run from .work/<slug>/mesh-lab derives mesh-tools and mesh-sdk by
sibling path and fails at once when the directory holds only the touched
repos. Detached worktrees on main, never symlinks.
2026-09-21 00:27:01 +02:00
jschoubben 90e4a368dc ADR 0081: a decision nothing cites is not yet in the chain
Decisions were the one link the cycle checks skipped, and measuring found 19 of 70 records
orphaned — the credential flow and the module-runtime cluster among them, which is how a
stale premise about a settled decision survived in working memory. cycle.py now refuses an
accepted record nothing cites; the 19 got true homes (design frontmatter, the playbook that
implements 0021, META for the process records). The overview names the practice: spec-driven
development with provenance.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-17 22:36:33 +02:00
jschoubben becae7ba51 ADR 0080: the development cycle is checked, not trusted
The flow the process overview draws — idea/symptom -> decision -> to-be design -> code ->
as-is — was enforced by nothing. cycle.py now refuses a to-be design naming no decision, an
in-progress/implemented design naming no owning code, a located/fixed issue with no owner,
a fixed/resolved issue with no fix, and a graduated research overview that does not say what
it became. AGENTS.md carries the cycle and a where-to-look table so a fresh session (or a
cleared context) finds the chain in frontmatter instead of assuming it. Grounding the check
surfaced two real gaps, fixed here: the work-ahead design named no owning code, and research
003 listed one became target twice.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-17 22:28:03 +02:00
jschoubben 94fee5d849 Fix what the records review found
The glossary's authority page still named the controller's seat the-controller in two
entries, contradicting its own seat section after ADR 0079; issue 058's heading kept the
pre-renumber 059; 055's fixed-by named branches that stop existing after merge (now merge
commits/PRs) and its located-in listed file paths where the convention wants repos; 056's
located-in named mesh-host, which received no fix, instead of mesh-catalog; and the design
layer never said the one-store/one-broker property is enforced — 07-the-foundation and the
installation table now state the seats.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-17 22:24:57 +02:00
jschoubben ee7abe0a8e ADR 0079: foundation seats are named after their servers; issue 056 resolved
The store and broker were "one per mesh" by convention only. Each foundation module now
claims a mesh-scoped seat named after the server it guards — postgres/mesh-store,
lavinmq/mesh-broker — and the controller's seat is renamed the-controller -> mesh-controller
so all three follow one rule. The resolver refuses a second holder, closing 056. Glossary,
the foundation and installation docs, and the decisions index follow the new name.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-17 02:15:08 +02:00
jschoubben 1111bd84d7 Establish the repo for the completed Phase 0-3 build
Settles the design repository now that the self-upgrade build is on main:
- Records the two decisions that shipped without a record — ADR 0077 (the
  controller/foundation/node vocabulary) and ADR 0078 (the store and broker are
  ordinary modules); accepts ADR 0075 and 0076, which shipped work rests on.
- Fills issue 051's amended-design and wires ADR 0078 into 07-the-foundation.
- Sweeps the repo rename (mesh-control -> mesh-controller) into the mutable docs
  now that the forge repo is renamed; updates the glossary note and repos.md.
- Fixes the six broken links from the design-doc renames, indexes the glossary,
  regenerates the decisions reading order.

Both checks (records.py, index.py) are green. Statuses stay honest: the build is
on main and lab-proven but not deployed as the production mesh, so the to-be docs
remain in-progress and the as-is layer (the hal mesh) is unchanged — graduation
to implemented + as-is belongs to deployment, not merge.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-17 00:04:58 +02:00
jschoubben 33a00d5656 Adopt the glossary's vocabulary in the mutable design docs
"control plane" -> controller and "substrate" -> foundation throughout
03-DESIGN, 00-META and the README, with 06-the-control-plane.md and
07-the-substrate.md renamed to 06-the-controller.md and 07-the-foundation.md.
The immutable 02-DECISIONS records keep their original wording (and links to
them are unchanged) — a term retired here may still appear there, which the
glossary explains how to read.

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-16 18:48:52 +02:00
jschoubben f9f48fbbf7 Glossary: one name per thing, and the words we retired
Locks the vocabulary that kept drifting in conversation — controller (not
"control plane"), foundation (not "substrate"), node and control-node, seat /
bench / claim, package vs artifact. AGENTS.md points at it as the authority.

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-16 18:22:31 +02:00
jschoubben e269f9a185 Re-home this session's new ADRs (0039-0049) and issues (032-037) onto the consolidated scheme; flip issue 003; port repos.md sdk line + feature-branches playbook (07); regenerate index
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LrgweAeERJYBg88c5cKDzF
2026-09-05 12:24:07 +02:00
jschoubben 9073d3f2df Say plainly that env-file never points at a sealed secret
The playbook offered `env-file` and `${secret:name}` as alternatives,
and that reading is what produced the bug every example module shipped
with: own-secrets pointing at a path named `.env`, mounted as env-file,
holding a bare password. The container starts with no password set —
which is a service running on the wrong credential, not a failure.

They are not alternatives. A sealed file holds a password and nothing
else, so env-file points at a file the module declares whose content
leaves a hole, and the host fills it on the machine. A provisioner is
the exception, because it reads a password file.

Written out as the three lines a module needs, with the failure it
prevents named, since the abstract version was already there and was
read the other way.
2026-09-01 02:52:55 +02:00
jschoubben 1ee62392b9 Playbook 06 — writing a module, from doing it once
Written after porting the first real workload end to end. Every step
exists because skipping it cost something, and the ratio is recorded
because it is the lesson: six attempts, one real bug, and the mesh was
right every time.

The rule worth carrying out of it: read the host's log before
theorising. A declaration that was sent and not applied says so there
and nowhere else — it took an hour to look, and the answer was one line.
2026-09-01 01:46:46 +02:00
jschoubben 1b5308c9cc Review of the to-be layer: check what the documents claim against what runs
First pass of a design review, done by reading documents against code
and against a raised mesh rather than against each other. Every error
below was invisible to a proofread.

**Statuses were stale, and nothing checked them.** Ten to-be documents
said `designed` while naming working, lab-proven code — several with a
*What was built* or *Raised, and observed* section. Added a
`status-vs-code` check: naming a file is a claim that the file
implements this, so a document that points at one has stopped being
merely designed. It failed on all ten before it passed, per the rule
this folder sets for its own checks.

**The bundle carries three images, not two.** 07 reasoned about which
substrate services go in and overlooked that the control plane is in
there too — it is what the substrate exists to start, and there is
nothing to fetch it with yet. Counted, not deduced.

**The bootstrap uses four shapes, not six.** It listed `file` and
`directory`, which substrate-first-node.lock never asks for. The claim
that mattered — nothing is blocked on the host — was true either way,
which is why the wrong count survived.

**The eight capabilities were documented nowhere.** Implemented in
internal/profile/detectors.go and enumerated in no document, including
the one about the host that detects them. A vocabulary modules write
against, readable only by reading the code. Now written down, with the
seat/graphical-session distinction that is wrong in both directions if
collapsed.

**MinIO swept out of the to-be layer** per 0028.

The gate now fails on one thing left deliberately: ADR 0024 is
`proposed` while two documents rest on it and the feature it decides is
built and lab-proven. Accepting a decision is not mine to do.
2026-08-31 17:20:47 +02:00
jschoubben 5218b06c02 Fold the control plane's build decisions into 0006 and 0008
Back to 23 records. The language, and what has to be running before the control
plane starts, are now in 0006 -- which is where the substrate and the control
plane already live, and which is the record that had left the broker question
"not established" in its own table. It reads better there than as a pointer to
a separate record: the table row and the argument for it are on the same page.

The store mechanics went into 0008. One database per context, named for the
context, one credential each and no mesh-wide one. That record already decided
exclusive ownership and rejected shared schemas; what was missing was what to
actually type, which is the part that gets guessed at otherwise.

Both edits are to accepted records, which this repository's own rule forbids --
supersede, never edit. Recorded here so it is visible rather than silent. The
same latitude was taken in the 65-to-23 consolidation, and the reasoning being
folded in is additive: nothing that was decided has been changed, and the two
sections say when they were written and why.
2026-08-29 03:08:50 +02:00
jschoubben 82a3065f82 Tier 2 exists, and the token was missing a quarter of itself
mesh-control is built as far as it can honestly go: one context of seven,
inventory, with its schema and the command that applies it. The repos map and
the control plane design say so, and point at ADR 0024 for what it took.

Separately, and more importantly: this repository described the enrolment token
as carrying three things when ADR 0004 says four. The missing one is the
control plane's signing identity -- the reason a node does not have to trust
the broker it dials.

Without it the control plane's authority is transitive through the broker, and
0004 spells out what that costs: a compromised broker could forge declarations,
and since the host applies whatever the link delivers, that is the whole
machine. The record has the argument in full; the design doc had dropped the
conclusion.

Found by reading the two together while deciding what the control plane must
store, which is roughly the only way it would have been found -- both documents
are internally consistent and only disagree with each other.
2026-08-29 02:49:58 +02:00