ADR 0050 Phase A. Rename the licence's `provider` field to `vendor` — the
inventory already uses "provider" for which node answers a brokered provision,
and one word must not carry two facts — and route the licence layer's sealing
and delivery through a per-vendor adapter selected by that field.
The rename touches the Go struct/params/SQL in internal/licences, the operator
CLI, and the schema: 0001 (the consolidated schema) now creates the column as
`vendor`; a new guarded 0002 renames it on a database that predates the change,
and is a no-op on a fresh one.
The adapter (internal/licences/adapters) has a `shape` and the two verbs a
static-key vendor needs — accept (the generic anonymous-box seal) and deliver
(the sealed blob unchanged). refresh/identity/usage are named as optional
capability interfaces so the refreshable-grant seam exists before its code.
A registry maps vendor→shape (anthropic→static-key for now, with a Phase-B
TODO to swap it to refreshable-grant); an unknown vendor is refused clearly.
Behaviour is unchanged from the operator's view except the field name.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LrgweAeERJYBg88c5cKDzF
novox/hq ADR 0024, gaps 1 and 2. The user's stated requirement, and the first
thing here that no machine can answer: a hosted model is on nobody's node and
is reached over the public internet, so the rule that refuses two ends sharing
no private network must not apply to it.
A licence is a named thing and the name is the operator's — *the personal
account*, *the organisation's* — because the whole point is saying which one a
given consumer uses, and an anonymous credential hanging off a provider cannot
be said. Many to many, so deliberately not a claim: two machines sharing an
account is ordinary rather than a collision.
Gap 2 is the missing verb, *accept*: take a value somebody supplied, seal it to
each holder, discard the plaintext. With the consequence stated rather than
hidden — a holder recorded after the key was supplied has no key and the mesh
cannot make one, so it is refused by name with the remedy, not silently handed
an empty file.
Refusal is felt, as the record warns: a mesh holding three ways to reach a
model refuses every consumer that has not chosen. So the refusal names the
candidates and the exact command. Being right is not the same as being usable.
Gaps 3 and 4 — a consumer that is not a machine, and switching as a reaction
rather than a declaration — remain gaps. Half-building them would put a
conditional in the declaration language, which is what ADR 0024 says plainly to
avoid.
Its own context, with its own store and its own credential: a licence is a
different aggregate from anything inventory owns, and it refers to nodes by
name because that is what crossing a context boundary may carry.
jschoubben