docs: add ArchitectureBlueprint for establishing config-atlas

Practical, efficiency-first blueprint: bound config-atlas to the map and
evidence layers, define the configuration-surface entry schema (modeled
on the existing capability-entry format), a read-only connector
discovery pipeline, CI validation, State Hub reuse for the config graph,
and a phased roadmap (Canon -> seed -> connectors -> explain) with a
build-vs-reuse table.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-06-26 19:54:35 +02:00
parent 9b89fc4026
commit 2f33349609

225
ArchitectureBlueprint.md Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,225 @@
# Architecture Blueprint — config-atlas
> How to establish config-atlas as an efficient, practical system.
> Companion to [`INTENT.md`](INTENT.md) (purpose/boundary),
> [`SCOPE.md`](SCOPE.md), and [`research/configuration-control-plane.md`](research/configuration-control-plane.md)
> (the thesis). Drafted 2026-06-26.
---
## 1. Design constraints (what "efficient and practical" means here)
These constraints come straight from `INTENT.md` and `SCOPE.md` and bound every
decision below:
1. **Map and evidence layers only.** config-atlas owns *Registry* and *Evidence*.
It does **not** build a runtime *Resolver*, *Delivery*, or *Control* engine
(research §5). Anything that resolves or pushes live values is out of scope.
2. **Source-linked, never a second source of truth.** Entries point at canonical
files/APIs; the atlas stores *metadata and references*, not live values, and
**never** secret values.
3. **Read-first before write-first.** Discover, classify, attribute ownership, and
explain — before any controlled-change ambition (research §6 wedge).
4. **Markdown + YAML, agent-legible.** No application runtime. Entries must be
diffable, reviewable in a PR, and parseable without bespoke tooling.
5. **Reuse the ecosystem.** Lean on `reuse-surface` (federation/validation), the
State Hub (workplans, relationships, evidence events), and existing engines
(CUE/JSON Schema, OPA) rather than reimplementing them.
The cheapest path to a *practical* system is therefore: **a well-specified entry
schema + validation in CI + a thin discovery pipeline + source links** — not a
service. Efficiency comes from buying, not building, every layer that already
exists elsewhere.
---
## 2. System overview
config-atlas realizes the left half of the control-plane pipeline. The right half
(resolve → deliver → control) is explicitly delegated to downstream systems.
```
OWNED BY config-atlas DELEGATED / EXTERNAL
┌─────────────────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────────────┐
│ Canon vocabulary + schema │ │ Resolver effective value │
│ Registry surface entries │ ---> │ Policy OPA / Kyverno / CUE │
│ Evidence relationships, audit │ │ Delivery env / ConfigMap /… │
└─────────────────────────────────┘ │ Control feature-flag plane │
▲ └──────────────────────────────┘
│ ingest (read-only connectors)
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Sources: repos · K8s/Helm · Terraform state · feature-flag platforms · │
│ secret-manager refs · cloud param stores · SaaS tenant settings │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
Five internal components, smallest-to-build first:
| Component | What it is | Build cost | Status |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| **Canon** | Schema + vocabulary for a config-surface entry; scope/precedence/merge model | low | partial (research has the model; needs a JSON Schema) |
| **Registry** | The corpus of surface entries + indexes | low | scaffold exists (`registry/`) |
| **Connectors** | Read-only ingest scripts that emit candidate entries | medium | not started |
| **Evidence graph** | Relationships (consumes/overrides/depends-on/secret-ref) + change audit | medium | partly free via State Hub |
| **Explain view** | Render an effective-config *path* from layered source links | medium-high | future |
---
## 3. The core artifact: the configuration-surface entry
Everything else exists to produce and validate these. Model it on the existing
capability-entry schema (`registry/capabilities/…`) so `reuse-surface` validation
and State Hub federation work unchanged. Proposed shape:
```yaml
---
id: surface.<domain>.<system>.<name> # stable, unique
name: Mail delivery batch sizing
kind: app-config | deploy-config | secret-ref | feature-flag |
policy | tenant-config | infra-state | runtime-override
summary: Controls max batch size for outbound mail delivery.
owner: platform-delivery # team/agent, not a person
status: draft | active | deprecated
scope: # which layers may set this (research §3.1)
allowed_layers: [company, environment, installation, tenant]
default_layer: company
mutability: hot-reloadable # build|deploy|startup|hot|per-request|emergency
security_class: operational # operational | sensitive | secret-ref | policy
schema: # the contract, not the value
type: integer
default: 500
minimum: 1
maximum: 5000
validator: schemas/mail-delivery.schema.json # JSON Schema or CUE ref
sources: # source-linked, never inlined values
- repo: railiance-platform
path: config/mail/delivery.yaml
role: company-baseline
- repo: railiance-platform
path: environments/prod.yaml
role: environment-overlay
relations:
consumed_by: [service.mail-gateway]
overrides: []
depends_on_secret: [] # references only, never the secret
related_to: [surface.platform.mail.rate-limit]
evidence:
last_seen: '2026-06-26' # from connector run
discovery_method: connector:git-grep | manual
change_log_ref: <state-hub progress event / PR url>
---
# Mail delivery batch sizing
Prose: what it means, why it exists, precedence notes, known gotchas.
```
Key efficiency choices:
- **`kind` is the primary classifier** — it drives the research §3 kind-separation
(secrets vs flags vs infra-state are never treated alike).
- **`scope.allowed_layers` encodes the layering contract** per key — this is the
durable value even before a resolver exists.
- **`sources[].role`** carries the layer each source contributes; this is what a
future Explain view consumes to render `config explain <key>`.
- **No value fields.** The atlas records *where* and *which layer wins by rule*,
never the live value.
---
## 4. Discovery (read-first connectors)
Connectors are **stateless, read-only scripts** that scan a source and emit
*candidate* entries (YAML) for human/agent review via PR. They never write live
systems and never auto-merge.
Minimum viable connector set — pick the 34 that prove cross-tool resolution:
| Connector | Source | Emits |
|-----------|--------|-------|
| `git-config` | repo grep for known config files/keys | `app-config`, `deploy-config` candidates |
| `helm-values` | Helm `values*.yaml` + overlays | `deploy-config` with layer roles |
| `terraform-vars` | TF/OpenTofu variables + tfvars | `infra-state` candidates |
| `flag-platform` | feature-flag API inventory | `feature-flag` candidates + stale-flag signal |
| `secret-ref` | grep for vault/OpenBao/SOPS refs | `secret-ref` (reference only) |
Pipeline: `connector → candidate YAML → PR → reuse-surface validate (CI) → merge`.
The human/agent in the loop is the practical substitute for a resolution engine in
the early phases — and is *cheaper and safer* than one.
---
## 5. Validation, evidence, and the graph
**Validation (CI, day one).** Every PR runs:
- `reuse-surface validate --root .` (entry well-formedness, index sync)
- `git diff --check`
- JSON Schema / CUE check of each entry's `schema` block against the Canon schema.
This is the single highest-leverage, lowest-cost piece: it makes the registry
*trustworthy* without any service.
**Evidence & graph — reuse the State Hub.** Do not build a graph database. The
relationships in §3 (`consumed_by`, `overrides`, `depends_on_secret`) plus State
Hub `progress`/`decision`/relationship records already give a config knowledge
graph (research §5) for free. config-atlas contributes the *config-typed edges*;
the hub stores and queries them.
**Explain view (later).** Once entries carry `sources[].role`, a small renderer can
produce the `config explain` output from the research primer — statically, from
source links, without reading live values. This is the first capability that feels
like a "control plane" and should be the headline of Phase 3.
---
## 6. Phased roadmap (efficient path to practical)
Each phase ships something usable and maps to an `ATLAS-WP-` workplan.
**Phase 0 — Canon (now, days).**
Write the surface-entry JSON Schema + the scope/precedence/merge model as a
machine-checkable doc. Replace the inherited `repo-template` capability artifact
(ATLAS-WP-0002). *Exit:* one real surface entry validates in CI.
**Phase 1 — Seed registry by hand (12 weeks).**
Hand-author 1020 entries for the highest-value Coulomb surfaces (start with
railiance-platform mail/rate-limit, secret-refs, key feature flags). Stand up CI
validation. *Exit:* a reviewer can answer "what configures X, who owns it, where"
from the repo alone.
**Phase 2 — First connectors (24 weeks).**
Build `git-config` + one of `helm-values`/`flag-platform`. Candidate-PR workflow.
*Exit:* registry grows from automated discovery, not just hand authoring; stale/
unowned surfaces are surfaced.
**Phase 3 — Explain & graph (4+ weeks).**
Render `config explain` from `sources[].role`; push config-typed edges to the State
Hub. *Exit:* given a key, show its layer path, what overrides what, owner, and
consumers — the read-first control-plane MVP.
**Deferred (out of current scope).** Live resolution, controlled change, approval
workflows, rollout/rollback orchestration — these belong to downstream systems
(`feature-control`, GitOps, the platform), not this repo.
---
## 7. Build-vs-reuse summary
| Need | Decision | Why |
|------|----------|-----|
| Entry validation / federation | **reuse** reuse-surface | already the federation contract |
| Workplans, relationships, audit | **reuse** State Hub | edges + evidence for free |
| Schema/merge validation | **reuse** JSON Schema, evaluate CUE | CUE's order-independent merge fits effective-config (research §3.3) |
| Policy checks | **reuse** OPA/Kyverno as backends | config-atlas is the context layer, not the engine |
| Secret storage | **never** — reference only | OpenBao owns values |
| Discovery connectors | **build** (thin, read-only) | the genuinely novel, repo-specific piece |
| Effective-config resolver / delivery | **don't build** | out of scope; delegated downstream |
The whole design optimizes for one thing: **the smallest amount of original
software that turns scattered configuration into a discoverable, explainable,
source-linked map** — and borrows everything else.
</content>