DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5
b2963105a8
The keycloak project ended with four open questions that design could not
settle. A two-VM lab was built to answer them by measurement, and this is
that material: 26 experiments, 125 raw command outputs, 22 browser captures.
Follows the import procedure in README.md.
source/ the originating repository verbatim — 78 documents, 28 SVGs,
8 manifests, plus .source-revision recording the commit
final/ the SSOT
document.md 729 lines written from the 29 experiment documents, not
concatenated: what was predicted, what was measured, and
where the measurement itself was wrong
evidence/raw 125 outputs, flattened to <experiment>__<file> because
the originals collided (01-baseline.txt appeared three
times) and the audit only globs the top level
evidence/meta one per raw file; command and exitCode are null and the
README says why rather than inventing them
evidence/browser 22 captures
assets/ three diagrams through techviz
.techviz/ their VizSpecs
A separate project rather than an addition to keycloak: the B-layer answers
that project's four questions, but the A, C and D layers are about cluster
failure, SSO and operations, and one document.md should hold one subject.
The four question records there can point here through 관계.
Recorded rather than papered over: only three of the 28 diagrams were
remade. The repository forbids hand-drawn SVG and forbids titles inside the
canvas; all 28 originals carry both, so converting them is redrawing, not
reformatting. They stay in source/ and the gap is written into the document.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
50 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
50 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
kind: CONCEPT
|
|
slug: messaging-admin-runtime-c02
|
|
title: 선언한 여섯 의존 중 셋이 import 0건이다
|
|
topic: composition-and-lifecycle-models
|
|
project: clean-architecture-backend-template
|
|
status: 게시 전
|
|
sourceRevision: 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916
|
|
rootTreeNode: concept:messaging-admin-runtime-c02
|
|
evidenceCapturedOn: 2026-09-01
|
|
assets:
|
|
- key: messaging-admin-runtime-c02
|
|
file: ../../../final/evidence/rendered/messaging-admin-runtime-c02.svg
|
|
evidence:
|
|
- ../../../final/evidence/raw/messaging-admin-runtime-c02.txt
|
|
source:
|
|
- 원본 분석 절은 analysis/messaging/messaging-admin-runtime.md#L78 이다.
|
|
module: messaging-admin-runtime
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# 선언한 여섯 의존 중 셋이 import 0건이다
|
|
|
|
`build.gradle`이 여섯 project를 `api`로 선언하는데 실측 import는 셋이 0건이다. 지금까지 본 리프 중 가장 많다.
|
|
|
|
## 본문
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:start -->
|
|
|
|
`build.gradle`이 여섯 project를 `api`로 선언하는데 실측 import(`EVD-308`)는 셋이 0건이다. 지금까지 본 리프 중 가장 많다.
|
|
|
|
| 선언 | 패키지 | import | 판정 |
|
|
|---|---|---:|---|
|
|
| `messaging-admin-api` | `…messaging.admin` | 45 | O |
|
|
| `messaging-core-api` | `…messaging.api` | 6 | O |
|
|
| `messaging-observability` | `…messaging.observation` | 1 | O |
|
|
| `messaging-policy` | `…messaging.policy` | **0** | X |
|
|
| `messaging-transport-spi` | `…messaging.transport` | **0** | X |
|
|
| `messaging-security` | `…messaging.security` | **0** | X |
|
|
|
|
## MessagingAdminService 참조 위치
|
|
|
|
:::evidence key="messaging-admin-runtime-c02" alt="코드베이스에서 MessagingAdminService 를 검색한 출력 4줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="MessagingAdminService 코드베이스 검색 — 4줄 · exit 0" zoom="true"
|
|
:::
|
|
|
|
## 빈이 되는 것은 둘뿐이다
|
|
|
|
배선은 starter 한 곳뿐이고, 이 리프에서 빈이 되는 것은 **둘**이다(`EVD-307`). `MessagingAdminService`, `ReplayService`, `RedriveService`, `DestructiveMessagingAdmin` — 넷 다 빈이 없다. starter 는 그중 하나에 대해서만 이유를 밝힌다. 나머지 셋의 부재에 대한 설명은 어디에도 없다.
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:end -->
|