3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
jschoubben 5dd439df50 inspect by kind, not the ambiguous bare form — a same-named network stops a container from ever being found
docker inspect <name> resolves across every object kind, not just
containers. A module regularly names a network the same as the
container that joins it (keycloak does this today, ordinarily) — so
when the container does not exist yet but the same-named network
already does, the bare form answers with the network's JSON instead
of reporting the container absent, and the template these callers use
(.State.Running) fails to execute against it entirely.

Live on novox tonight: minio's LB container, named the same as its
network ("minio"), could never be created — every apply crashed on
"the container runtime could not say whether minio is here", stuck
since first push, because the check itself never got a clean answer.

Fixed at every call site asking a container's state by name
(containerState, inspectFound, NamesFree, raiseGiteaServer,
containerRunning) by scoping to `docker container inspect`, matching
the type-scoped form this codebase already uses correctly for
networks, volumes and images elsewhere. Also scoped the one image
inspect that was still bare (publish.go), for the same reason.

mesh-host runs as a host-level service (nox-mesh-host.service), not a
Docker module — merging this does not redeploy it. The live novox
failure persists until the service itself is rebuilt and updated.
2026-09-24 19:50:16 +02:00
jschoubben 121367319d Rename mesh-control -> mesh-controller, substrate -> foundation
One name per thing, per the HQ glossary: the module/container/image/binary/repo
becomes mesh-controller, the seat the-controller, and the store+broker pair the
foundation (embedded base bundles, default template and example lock renamed with
their go:embed directives). No behaviour change — a pure vocabulary rename.

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
2026-09-16 18:40:40 +02:00
jschoubben b82ab95f74 mesh-bootstrap: the first-node procedure, as a program rather than a test
The only complete written-down copy of how a mesh is stood up was an integration
test in the lab. That is why every bootstrap gap kept being found late: an install
procedure that lives as a test fixture is exercised by whoever writes tests, never
by whoever installs. This is that procedure.

A separate binary, not a mesh-host subcommand. mesh-host says of itself that it
connects to nothing and listens on nothing and that what it applies comes from a
file, and that sentence is what makes an always-running root daemon auditable. An
installer loads images and interrogates a control plane. Same tier, different
program.

The control plane's image is carried, not built and not fetched. The forge that
holds its source runs on the mesh, so a bootstrap that had to fetch it would need
a mesh in order to raise one. Embedding breaks that cycle the way the carried
bundle breaks "copy it onto a machine and run it". The image id is read out of the
saved tar before the runtime is asked anything, which is what makes the load
idempotent: the installer can ask whether the machine already holds exactly this.

Five steps, each idempotent and each saying whether it found or changed something,
because this is run over and over by somebody getting a machine working. It stops
at a running substrate with a control plane that replies — enrolment, the module
catalogue and assignment are the next stage and are deliberately absent.

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LrgweAeERJYBg88c5cKDzF
2026-09-10 23:17:30 +02:00