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>
2.1 KiB
2.1 KiB
kind, slug, title, topic, project, status, sourceRevision, rootTreeNode, evidenceCapturedOn, assets, evidence, source, module
| kind | slug | title | topic | project | status | sourceRevision | rootTreeNode | evidenceCapturedOn | assets | evidence | source | module | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CONCEPT | messaging-cloudevents-c02 | 런타임 classpath에는 오르고 어느 @Bean도 만들지 않는다 | schema-and-wire-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:messaging-cloudevents-c02 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
messaging-cloudevents |
런타임 classpath에는 오르고 어느 @Bean도 만들지 않는다
들어오는 것: messaging-core-api(api), messaging-schema-api(api), cloudevents-api:4.0.1(api), cloudevents-core:4.0.1(implementation). 나가는 것: messaging-spring-boot-starter의 allowed_dependencies에 포함된다.
관계
- 왕복이라 부르는 테스트는 무엇을 보존하지 않는지도 적는다 같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
- 문서가 범위를 제한하면 그 제한을 누가 강제하는지 같이 적는다 같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
본문
들어오는 것은 messaging-core-api(api), messaging-schema-api(api), cloudevents-api:4.0.1(api), cloudevents-core:4.0.1(implementation)이다. 나가는 것은 messaging-spring-boot-starter의 allowed_dependencies에 포함된다.
CloudEventMapper 참조 위치
:::evidence key="messaging-cloudevents-c02" alt="코드베이스에서 CloudEventMapper 를 검색한 출력 3줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="CloudEventMapper 코드베이스 검색 — 3줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
classpath에 오르는 경로
app-bootstrap → starter → 이 leaf 경로로 런타임 classpath에 오른다.
그런데 아무도 부르지 않는다
starter의 어느 @Bean도 CloudEventMapper를 만들지 않고, 어느 클래스도 import하지 않는다(§12.1). bean 없음(Spring 주석 0개).