Files
hq/01-RESEARCH
jschoubben 5b3d0ebd4f ADR 0046 — the installer fetches what it pins
The blocking question was where a container image comes from, and the version
that blocked assumed the machine might have no network. That assumption came
from the LAB: a scenario is a closed address space by design, which is what lets
two scenarios hold the same addresses without meeting. Production is not sealed
— a machine being adopted has a network, and one that does not is a machine
where very little works anyway.

So substrate.lock carries references, not payload: an image name and a digest,
fetched at apply time. A first node pulls from upstream because no mesh registry
exists yet; every node after that pulls from the mesh's own. The lab is the
exception and places images itself, the way it already places the host binary —
a property of a test environment, and letting it dictate the production design
would be the tail wagging the dog.

Pinned by DIGEST rather than tag. Reproducibility comes from pinning the
identity of a thing, not from carrying its bytes, which is what makes fetching
acceptable rather than a compromise.

ADR 0041 survives untouched, which was the point. "Copy it onto a machine and
run it" stays literally true — one binary, a few megabytes, which then fetches
what it was told to. Carrying images would have quietly redefined the property
that decision rests on.

Costs accepted and named: an apply can now fail because something is
unreachable, which a self-contained artifact could not, so it must fail legibly
— naming what it could not fetch and from where. And the lab needs a way to
place images into a machine that also has no container runtime, both of which
are lab-installation concerns and neither solved here.

Research 012's build-time-versus-apply-time reframing narrows accordingly: it
still holds for what a tailored installer contains, and no longer has to hold
for images.
2026-08-26 23:52:46 +02:00
..

01-RESEARCH

Investigations that have not yet hardened into design.

Structure

Each effort lives in NNN-descriptive-name/ and must contain 00-overview.md, carrying its state in YAML frontmatter and a prose summary below it:

---
status: active | graduated | abandoned
initiated: YYYY-MM-DD
touches: []          # design docs, subsystems or areas the effort bears on
became: []           # required when status is terminal — what it turned into
---

The prose says what is being investigated, why, and what it touches. It does not restate the status — status lives in one place, and two places is one too many.

Further documents in the same folder hold the work itself: notes, evidence, option analyses, draft designs.

Lifecycle

status Meaning
active Investigation in progress.
graduated Checked against 00-META, decided in 02-DECISIONS/, and specified in 03-DESIGN — see became:.
abandoned Stopped or superseded. Nothing is deleted.

An effort graduates by producing a decision record and a 03-DESIGN entry. It is abandoned in place — never deleted. What was rejected, and why, is the more expensive half to rediscover.

Starting and closing efforts is playbook territory: 00-META/process/01-research.md and 02-graduation.md.

Rules

  • Markdown only. Do not skip or reuse a sequence number.
  • Evidence, not assertion. An effort that measured nothing has not finished.
  • Research describes real observations but never identifies the mesh it observed. The shape of a finding survives anonymisation intact.