Files
hq/04-ISSUES
jschoubben c0ae8dec96 Remove two disclosures, and record Nox as the answer to 006
Found by a full scan before making the repository public, which is the
moment the public rule stops being aspirational.

A module name identified a specific laptop model — hardware inventory,
which is operational detail about one installation rather than a lesson
that travels. Generalised.

ADR 0028 named a forge username in a repository path, which the public
rule forbids, and the sentence had also gone stale: the repository it
described was subsequently verified empty of anything unique and removed.
Rewritten to state what happened without the username. Removing a
disclosure from a record is the same class as fixing a path — the rule
that permits it outranks the one that forbids editing.

Issue 006 gains its proposed direction: Nox works from within this
repository rather than these documents being synced into the knowledge
base. Better on three counts — no copy, so no drift; no fourth knowledge
system, which was the original objection; always current.

But it changes the promise, and the issue says so. ADR 0019 promised these
documents would surface BESIDE everything else in a symptom search. An
agent that must be asked is reachable, not surfacing, and the two differ
in precisely the case the operational memory exists for — someone
debugging an error with no reason to suspect HQ knows anything about it.
The question narrows to whether a symptom search finds this content
without the searcher already suspecting it.
2026-08-23 21:40:53 +02:00
..

04-ISSUES

The front door for "something is wrong" at the level of the mesh's design or governance. Diagnosis happens here, where the whole mesh is in view; the fix lands in the owning code repository.

What belongs here

Belongs here Belongs in the knowledge base
The design permits a failure to be silent How to fix one occurrence of it
A documented rule is enforced by nothing A command that works around it
A stated invariant is false in practice A node-specific quirk
The owner is unknown and finding it needs the whole mesh in view Symptom → fix, once the answer is known

The knowledge base already holds the operational record and is indexed on symptoms. This folder is not a second copy of it. An issue here is a question HQ must answer; an entry there is an incident someone must clear. An issue whose answer is a general lesson belongs in both.

Structure

NNN-short-name/
  00-report.md      the symptom as observed, with the evidence; status in frontmatter
  01-diagnosis.md   the investigation trail, dated, including what was ruled out

Frontmatter, on 00-report.md

---
status: open | diagnosing | located | resolved | wontfix
opened: YYYY-MM-DD
located-in: []       # owning repo(s) or module(s), filled by diagnosis
fixed-by:            # pull request or commit reference, filled at resolution
amended-design:      # design doc path, when the root cause was a design gap
---

Rules

  • Anyone may open an issue. No localisation is required to report one.
  • The full flow is playbook 00-META/process/03-issues.md.
  • Closed issues are never deleted — they are the mesh's symptom-to-component memory.
  • wontfix is legitimate and requires a sentence saying why.