The one real fix from the review of the (now closed) registry hand-over PR #47. One line: distribution's claim the-artifact-store goes from node scope to mesh scope.
Why: 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. 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 — the claim now says so by name, where a second one is assigned.
Pairs with novox/mesh-controller fix/the-artifact-store-is-one-per-mesh, which adds the catalogue-backed test (it skips on the controller's CI until this lands). Nothing else from the gate work: no config mount, no second process, no route.
The one real fix from the review of the (now closed) registry hand-over PR #47. One line: `distribution`'s claim `the-artifact-store` goes from node scope to mesh scope.
**Why**: 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. 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 — the claim now says so by name, where a second one is assigned.
Pairs with novox/mesh-controller `fix/the-artifact-store-is-one-per-mesh`, which adds the catalogue-backed test (it skips on the controller's CI until this lands). Nothing else from the gate work: no config mount, no second process, no route.
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.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
The one real fix from the review of the (now closed) registry hand-over PR #47. One line:
distribution's claimthe-artifact-storegoes from node scope to mesh scope.Why: node-scoped, a second
distributionon another machine resolved cleanly there, and only afterwards did the mesh noticeartifact-storeoffered by two nodes, with every consumer elsewhere refusing to choose. 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 — the claim now says so by name, where a second one is assigned.Pairs with novox/mesh-controller
fix/the-artifact-store-is-one-per-mesh, which adds the catalogue-backed test (it skips on the controller's CI until this lands). Nothing else from the gate work: no config mount, no second process, no route.