jochen
1d524a1fa8
The previous version ranked candidates on whether they preserved single sign-on to the object store's console. That is not a requirement: a "user" of the store is normally an application, so the requirement is per-application keys scoped to buckets — which the mesh already mints. And the console login it ranked on never worked; the module's own hook comment records "policy claim missing", a failing login written up as progress. It also omitted the incumbent's own maintained fork, which changes the question from "which product replaces it" into two decisions: repoint, or migrate — and if migrating, to which. Repointing costs an image reference; migrating costs a data copy, two handler rewrites and a maintenance window. Repointing does not foreclose migrating, which is the argument for taking it first. On the corrected requirement Garage ranks first — its per-key-per-bucket model is the requirement verbatim, its admin API matches how the mesh provisions, and the highest-risk consumer is first-party documented against it. Its remaining gap (no versioning, no server-side encryption, partial lifecycle) is unmeasured against the buckets and is the one thing that could still disqualify it. Measured and folded in: 230 GiB logical, 82,496 objects, 468 GiB raw at 2.03x, eight drive directories on one filesystem on one machine. That last fact decides more than any feature — the erasure coding is not buying independent-drive redundancy, so the redundancy model is close to irrelevant and only storage overhead remains, which at this volume is a rounding error against the headroom. Both errors are recorded at the end of 01 rather than quietly fixed. A configured feature is not an observed one; and when a dependency dies, "who took it over" precedes "what replaces it" — searching for alternatives by construction returns things that are not the incumbent.
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.