2026-09-05 10:27:11 +00:00
2 changed files with 48 additions and 3 deletions
@@ -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 ## Open (superseded by the above) questions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 |
 |---|---|
@@ -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 |