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
kind, slug, title, topic, project, status, sourceRevision, rootTreeNode, evidenceCapturedOn, assets, evidence, source, module, priority
| kind | slug | title | topic | project | status | sourceRevision | rootTreeNode | evidenceCapturedOn | assets | evidence | source | module | priority | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CASE | messaging-testkit-f05 | messaging-transport-spi 의존이 import 0건이다 | runtime-reachability-and-composition | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | case:messaging-testkit-f05 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
messaging-testkit | P3 |
messaging-transport-spi 의존이 import 0건이다
policy 와 달리 transport-spi 는 쓸 자리가 보이지 않는다. 제거 후보.
문제
policy 와 달리 transport-spi 는 쓸 자리가 보이지 않는다.
제거 후보.
결론
policy 와 달리 transport-spi 는 쓸 자리가 보이지 않는다.
제거 후보.
검증 환경
OpenJDK : 21.0.12 java -version 으로 확인 Gradle : 9.0.0 src/gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.properties 의 distributionUrl 로 확인 확인 방식 : 선언된 의존에 대한 패키지 이름 import 전수 검색 소스 수정 : x
재현 조건
원문은 analysis/messaging/messaging-testkit.md#L972 에 있다.
본문
messaging-transport-spi 의존이 import 0건이다.
import 0 건인 의존
:::evidence key="messaging-testkit-f05" alt="분석 문서 analysis/messaging/messaging-testkit.md 에서 이 기록의 근거 절을 그대로 잘라낸 15줄. 코드베이스를 측정한 것이 아니라 원본 판정이 무엇을 적었는지를 보여 준다." caption="analysis/messaging/messaging-testkit.md 발췌 — 15줄" zoom="true" :::
policy 와 다르다
policy 쪽은 쓸 자리가 분명한데(§P3의 1 MiB 한도) transport-spi 는 쓸 자리가 보이지 않는다. 제거 후보.
확인하지 못한 것
의존을 제거하고 빌드를 돌려 보지 않았다. import 0 건으로 판정했으므로 간접 사용은 배제하지 못했다.