jschoubben
a625e6c709
Designed with no reference to what came before, which was asked for. The system this replaces has features — several deployable units inside one module — and they are deliberately absent. That closes something ADR 0001 has been carrying as an open prerequisite. It lists "named features with per-node opt-in" as required, or "every independently deployable unit becomes a module again and the count returns". The premise was right and the remedy already exists in another form: several modules, assignment per node, and a module with requirements and no files of its own. `networking` is exactly that. The count does not return because what made it return — a module is expensive, so put several things in one — is gone. A module here is a manifest and usually nothing else. The manifest in a repository names artifacts; the manifest the mesh holds names digests. Two documents, because a digest is not knowable until something is built and a repository carrying one is wrong the moment anybody edits anything. The builder runs on a node. Building needs a container runtime and a working tree, and what the control plane may send a machine is bounded by the declaration language. A control plane holding a container socket would be the one component that can do anything anywhere. And the host's vocabulary grew from six shapes to eight — user and archive — with the reasoning for each and for the refusals that came with them. The count is asserted by a test precisely because every addition widens what a compromised control plane can express.
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.