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>
2.4 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 | application-core-c07 | forRemoval이 붙었는데 production consumer가 남아 있다 | delivery-and-settlement-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:application-core-c07 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
application-core |
forRemoval이 붙었는데 production consumer가 남아 있다
raw key/whole-byte legacy 계약과 provider-neutral semantic 계약이 같은 leaf에 공존하고, 제거 시점이 날짜가 아니라 실제 usage로 문서화돼 있다.
관계
- legacy storage/notification compatibility surface의 제거 조건 추적 같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
본문
application.storage.ObjectStoragePort는 raw object key/whole-byte 방식의 legacy contract이며 forRemoval 표시가 있지만 실제 production consumer가 남아 있다. sample poster upload, adapter/config, characterization test에서 사용되므로 dead code로 분류할 수 없다.
FilesystemCsvExportAdapter 참조 위치
:::evidence key="application-core-c07" alt="코드베이스에서 FilesystemCsvExportAdapter 를 검색한 출력 8줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="FilesystemCsvExportAdapter 코드베이스 검색 — 8줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
제거 시점을 날짜로 적지 않았다
제거 시점은 날짜가 아니라 실제 migration/zero usage로 판단하도록 문서화돼 있다. fileexport 역시 raw filesystem path를 반환하는 opt-in legacy capability이며 FilesystemCsvExportAdapter/configuration을 통해 조건부 활성화된다.
receipt surface에 raw Path가 없는 쪽
반대로 filepublication은 logical destination, operation/reference/version, schema, row streaming/checkpoint, durability semantic을 provider-neutral 계약으로 만든다. CSV formula injection(=, +, -, @, tab, CR)을 reject하는 정책이 테스트로 고정돼 있고, raw Path/SFTP/fileserver 타입이 receipt surface에 나오지 않는다.