railiance-platform/docs/adr/ADR-0003-decisions-live-in-the-repo.md
codex e7e4e33bb8 RPF-WP-0018 T01-T06: publish S3 posture, placement policy, quotas, ADR surface
T01 docs/tenancy-posture.md - vector set per service rather than one repo
vector, with the provider-versus-consumer finding routed to net-kingdom.
T02/T03/T06 docs/placement-policy.md - accepts placement ownership scoped
to rule-here/number-there, records a placement owner per workload, reports
the latency-critical + batch co-residency on platform-pg, marks the
connection-ceiling trigger unmonitored pending railiance-telemetry, and
answers the retention floor/ceiling question.
T04 s3-consumer-interfaces 1.1.0 - quota disclosure per SS10.2. Surfaces
that apps-pg has no backup, no resource limits and no tuned parameters.
T05 docs/adr/ created with a mandatory-frontmatter convention and the
first three ADRs. This repo previously held none.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-17 21:55:11 +02:00

67 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown

---
title: "ADR-0003 — Decisions that bind others live in docs/adr, not only in the State Hub"
status: accepted
revision: "1.0"
owner: railiance-platform
date: "2026-08-17"
last_reviewed: "2026-08-17"
review_interval: 12m
---
# ADR-0003 — Decisions that bind others live in `docs/adr`, not only in the State Hub
## Context
This repo recorded decisions with the State Hub's `record_decision()` and wrote
governing content as prose in `docs/` — 24 files on 2026-08-17, none carrying a
status, owner, revision or review date. It held no ADRs at all.
Two things made that a defect rather than a style.
**The hub is a read model.** The estate's standing rule is that local files are
the source of truth and the hub reflects them. A decision that exists only as a
hub record inverts that for the one class of content where it matters most.
**`policy-nexus` publishes canon and ADRs only**, globbing `docs/adr/*.md` from
each repo. A repo with no ADRs is invisible to the estate's publication surface
no matter how much governing content it holds. This repo owns S3 boundary
rules, the credential-lane model and the consumption-mode gate — all binding on
other repos, all unpublishable.
The gap was structural, not an oversight: nothing in the session protocol ever
told anyone to write an ADR here.
## Decision
**A decision that binds anyone outside this repo is recorded as an ADR in
`docs/adr/`, with the frontmatter in `docs/adr/README.md`, before or alongside
any hub record.** The hub record points at the ADR; it does not replace it.
Runbooks and procedures stay as prose in `docs/` and stay unpublished. The test
is not importance — several runbooks are critical — but whether the document
*decides* something for someone else.
## Consequences
- `docs/adr/` exists, with a convention, a template and this repo's first three
ADRs.
- Existing prose is not converted wholesale. Content is promoted when it is
next touched, or when a consumer needs to cite it.
- `last_reviewed` and `review_interval` are mandatory here, which is stricter
than the estate norm — of 69 ADRs across 19 repos on 2026-08-17, 21 had YAML
frontmatter and 2 had any notion of a review date. `POLICY-NEXUS-WP-0001` T05
cannot compute staleness without those fields and must not invent them, since
inventing them would make the publication a second source of truth, which is
that workplan's own top risk. Routed as `RPF-WP-0018` finding F5.
- Session protocol guidance should follow, so the next agent writes an ADR
without being told. Not done in this ADR.
## Alternatives considered
**Keep decisions in the hub and have `policy-nexus` read it.** Rejected on
both sides: it would make a read model authoritative, and it would give the
publication surface a source that no repo can diff or review.
**Add frontmatter to all 24 existing `docs/` files.** Rejected. Most are
runbooks that should not be published, and stamping them with a status would
assert a decision that was never made.