One object store, not two

object-store.json and minio.json described the same thing: same image, same provision at the same scope, same provisioner. Not two implementations a person could choose between — one module written twice. Assigning both to a node would have collided on `s3-bucket`. It exists because it was written first, to pair with photos.json for the README's worked edge, and minio.json was the fuller version of the same module written later. Nobody removed the first. The pair test keeps its point and now reads the surviving one. Checked across the rest: this was the only duplicate.
2026-09-01 21:06:17 +02:00
parent 0d975a051d
commit 4d6ec5b10c
5 changed files with 67 additions and 89 deletions
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ is `mesh0` on every machine, and the address a resolver listens on for the machi

 ## Asking for a bucket

-`object-store.json` provides one, `photos.json` asks for one. Together they are the whole of an
+`minio.json` provides one, `photos.json` asks for one. Together they are the whole of an
 edge, and they are here as a **pair** because that is the only way to see the halves line up:

 | the provider says | the consumer says |