Files
hq/04-ISSUES/001-failed-package-install-reports-success/00-report.md
T
jschoubben 702efca6bb Base layer: the mesh as it is, under the mesh as it should be
HQ held only the to-be. Every reader had to already know the system the
decisions were about, and an as-is claim had nowhere to live except inside
an intention.

Adds 02-DESIGN/00-as-is — eleven documents written from the implementation
and the operational record, not from intent, including the parts nobody
would choose again. The two existing designs move under 01-to-be. Layers
are declared in frontmatter and never mix: a design that ships does not
move, its as-is counterpart is written, and both stand.

Back-fills adr/0001-0014 for decisions taken in implementation and never
recorded — the broker, the module abstraction, the mesh database, managed
files, provisioning, migrations, the workspace removal, failing loudly,
the constitution, application placement, linking, the employee model, the
artifact, the three silos. Each marked reconstructed, dated from the
history, and citing the evidence it was recovered from. The two existing
records renumber to 0015 and 0016 so the ledger runs oldest first;
0017 extends 0015 to modules outside the core, principle only — the
domain list is deliberately not invented here.

how-we-build.md becomes the source of the mesh constitution, with a sync
playbook, so the enforced copy stops being the only one that is true.

Process becomes explicit: five playbooks, eight thin skills that defer to
them, a repository map, and AGENTS.md with CLAUDE.md as its include.

The five Observations become 04-ISSUES 001-005 where they can be owned and
closed. 006 is new and uncomfortable: HQ is not indexed into the knowledge
base. That claim is what decision 27 rests on, it was never checked, and
the README now says so instead of repeating it.

Also corrects the ADR index into something generated, the "02-DESIGN is
empty" claim, the VISION.md pointer that did not survive the repo split,
and a note asserting the symlink rule was contradicted — it was a
misreading; the rule forbids hand-made links, the installer links by design.
2026-08-23 03:08:26 +02:00

1.5 KiB

status, opened, located-in, fixed-by, amended-design
status opened located-in fixed-by amended-design
open 2026-08-22

001 — A failed package install does not fail the job

Symptom

A module declared a package. The install produced, from every mirror:

error: failed retrieving file … 404

followed by:

-> error installing repo packages

The prepare job then reported success. The package is absent; the pipeline is green.

Why this matters more than one missing package

The first thing the lab work asked the mesh to install demonstrated the exact fault the lab exists to catch — a step that failed, reported success, and left the next step to run against state that was never produced.

It is also a direct violation of a decision already taken and recorded: ADR 0008 says a step that fails must fail the job. That record notes the rule is applied instance by instance and enforced by no mechanism. This is an instance where it was never applied.

Evidence

  • Observed 2026-08-22 while declaring the virtualisation package required by ADR 0016.
  • A fix is written and open as a pull request, unmerged since 2026-08-20.

Open questions

  • Why is the failure swallowed — is the exit status discarded, or never checked?
  • Is this specific to package installation, or does the surrounding stage swallow every non-zero exit?
  • The fix has been open for two days. What is the review path for a change of this class?