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>
49 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
49 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
kind: CONCEPT
|
|
slug: messaging-admin-api-c07
|
|
title: 승인이 처음에는 데이터였고 지금은 타입이다
|
|
topic: state-machines-and-ownership
|
|
project: clean-architecture-backend-template
|
|
status: 게시 전
|
|
sourceRevision: 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916
|
|
rootTreeNode: concept:messaging-admin-api-c07
|
|
evidenceCapturedOn: 2026-09-01
|
|
assets:
|
|
- key: messaging-admin-api-c07
|
|
file: ../../../final/evidence/rendered/messaging-admin-api-c07.svg
|
|
evidence:
|
|
- ../../../final/evidence/raw/messaging-admin-api-c07.txt
|
|
source:
|
|
- 원본 분석 절은 analysis/messaging/messaging-admin-api.md#L802 이다.
|
|
module: messaging-admin-api
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# 승인이 처음에는 데이터였고 지금은 타입이다
|
|
|
|
javadoc이 커밋 로그를 대신한다. 여섯 개의 "이전에는 이랬다" 기록이 전부 같은 결함 계열을 가리킨다 — 자기 자신을 근거로 삼는 주장.
|
|
|
|
## 본문
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:start -->
|
|
|
|
`messaging-testkit` 과 마찬가지로 이 리프도 **javadoc 이 커밋 로그를 대신한다**. 여섯 개의 "이전에는 이랬다" 기록이 있고, 전부 같은 결함 계열을 가리킨다: **자기 자신을 근거로 삼는 주장.**
|
|
|
|
| 위치 | 기록된 과거 결함 |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| `VerifiedApproval.java:9-13` | "…a plain `AdminApproval` record with a public constructor, so 'this plan was approved' was a claim the caller made about itself." |
|
|
| `ApprovalGrant.java:11-14` | "`AdminApproval` carried a ticket, an approver, and a window. Nothing in it said which operation… the audit trail recorded a ticket that proved nothing about what was executed." |
|
|
| `PlanDigest.java:12-16` | "The operator who got a redrive of one dead-letter destination approved could execute a redrive of a different one with the same ticket, and every audit record would look correct." |
|
|
| `AdminOperationJournal.java:10-14` | "…a `ConcurrentHashMap` registered by the starter as the default… both are worse than having no store at all because the map made the platform look protected." |
|
|
| `AdminOperationState.java:5-9` | "…recorded one fact — 'this approval was claimed' — and recorded it before any work happened." |
|
|
|
|
## 이 기록이 다루는 파일 범위
|
|
|
|
:::evidence key="messaging-admin-api-c07" alt="코드베이스에서 파일 목록을 만든 출력 25줄. 이 기록이 다루는 범위가 그 목록이다." caption="코드베이스 파일 목록 — 25줄 · exit 0" zoom="true"
|
|
:::
|
|
|
|
## 일곱 기록이 하나의 이야기다
|
|
|
|
**승인이 처음에는 데이터였고, 지금은 타입이다.** 커밋 로그 자체는 정보가 없다.
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:end -->
|