Review of the registry work found it node-scoped: a second `distribution` on another
machine resolved cleanly there, and only afterwards did the mesh notice `artifact-store`
offered by two nodes, with every consumer elsewhere refusing to choose. Worse, a node-scoped
requirement with one candidate installs that candidate, so anything that wanted the store
beside it would have raised a fresh, empty store on the wrong machine first.
There is one store in a mesh, which was already the effective rule; the claim now says it
where a second one is assigned, by name, instead of leaving consumers to discover it.
A module's identity is the software it is (ADR 0040). Two were named after the
job instead, and the job already had a name.
firewall installs the nftables package and runs nftables.service. The seat it
claims is the-packet-filter, which is correctly named for the role. Calling the
module firewall named neither the software nor the provision, and promised that
any firewall could sit there — the false genericity the naming rule forbids.
registry runs Distribution, the OCI reference implementation, and provides
artifact-store. So registry was a third name for a thing that already had two,
which is how one word ended up meaning the module, the software and the concept
in the same paragraph.
The capability stays firewall, and correctly: a capability IS a functionality, so
a node having one and fail2ban requiring one are both right. Only the module
moves.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
jschoubben