Files
hq/04-ISSUES
jschoubben ce6ae943b7 Merge main: renumber this branch's records around the trunk's
Both lines of work numbered from the same point, so four decision records and one design
document existed twice with different content. The trunk keeps its numbers and this branch
yields — the only rule that scales, because the trunk's are already cited by what merged
before them.

  0117 the bus is the only broker        -> 0125
  0118 a module declares its own seats   -> 0126
  0119 amqp is a provision, not the bus  -> 0127
  0120 the mesh bus is required          -> 0128
  0123 a seat carries its role's protocol -> 0129
  0124 the predecessor is ending          -> 0130
  design 29, what a module declares       -> design 32

Applied to the code repositories too, because a stale reference is worse when numbers
collide than when they dangle: the reader lands on a real record that decided something
else.

Two reconciliations the merge forced, both real:

**0110 was marked wholly superseded and was not.** Its successor says in as many words that
everything 0110 decided about what a seat *is* stands untouched — and two records that
landed on the trunk rest on exactly that part. So it is accepted again, extended rather than
replaced, with a note saying which of its claims moved and where.

**A seat's protocol becomes columns, not fields.** The trunk moved the seat set out of
compiled code into a table the controller owns. This branch had added what a role accepts,
emits and serves to the Go slice. The decision is unaffected and the mechanism is better for
it: giving a role a protocol is now a write rather than a rebuild, which is the trunk's own
argument applied to what this branch added.

One check still fails and it fails on main too: a record resting on ADR 0112 while that is
still 'proposed'. Left alone — it is not this merge's to answer.
2026-09-27 18:23:41 +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.