jschoubben
86a084b7ff
Design 29 said no module requires the bus. The catalogue disagrees: 49 of 72 modules take a broker credential and 23 do not, so an ambient connection mints an account for a third of the catalogue that never speaks — and the 49 each hand-write the path it lands at, which is provisioning done badly by hand. The bootstrap argument that made it ambient was narrower than it looked. "A provisioner needs an account before it can run" is true of a provisioner process and says nothing about a provision the controller answers, and the controller is not waiting on a bus account to compose one. So: the mesh-broker seat delivers mesh-bus; a module requires it and gets an address, a sealed credential and the trust to verify the server; a module that requires nothing has no account at all. The requirement delivers the connection, the declarations shape the authority, and declaring a subject without requiring the bus is refused as incoherent. mesh-bus and nats are deliberately two names: a module may run its own NATS as a backing service exactly as one provides amqp, and a manifest saying "nats" would otherwise mean either the mesh's nervous system or a private queue. The seat's Delivers was wrong twice today — amqp, then empty — and the comment says so rather than reading as though it were always right.
03-DESIGN
The authoritative specification. Implementation is built against what is written here.
Two layers
| Folder | What it is |
|---|---|
00-as-is/ |
The mesh that exists today. Shipped behaviour, described as it is — including behaviour nobody would choose again. |
01-to-be/ |
The mesh being built toward. Every statement traceable to a record in 02-DECISIONS/. |
They are never mixed. A statement about the future does not belong in an as-is document, and an as-is document is never edited to describe an intention.
When a to-be design ships, it does not move. Its as-is counterpart is written or updated,
the to-be document's status becomes implemented, and both stand — one describing what runs,
the other recording what was intended. Deleting the intention loses the reasoning, which is
the expensive half.
Frontmatter
Every design document (not the READMEs) carries:
---
layer: as-is | to-be
status: designed | in-progress | implemented | abandoned
code: [] # owning code repo(s), from 00-META/repos.md
updated: YYYY-MM-DD # date of the last status change, not of text edits
decisions: [] # 02-DECISIONS/ records this document rests on
---
For an as-is document, status: implemented is the normal state — it describes something that
runs — and code: names where that implementation lives.
Status changes when implementation state changes, never because design text was edited. An
implemented claim must be defensible from the owning repository's main branch, not from
intent. If it cannot be checked, it is in-progress.
Cross-cutting views are generated from this frontmatter by the hq-status skill and never
written to disk.
What belongs here
Functional analysis, architectural description, and specification — prose and diagrams
only, no code. A manifest field may be named; a manifest may not be pasted. A document
enters the to-be layer only after the decision behind it is recorded in 02-DECISIONS/
and the research that produced it is closed.
Subfolders are encouraged where a layer grows enough to need them.