docs(adr): record Kysely containment decision as ADR-006

docs/adr/ADR-002-node-24-lts-runtime.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+# ADR-002: Node.js 24 LTS runtime
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-31
+- Deciders: platform stream
+- References: ADR index (section 70), Technology stack wiki (sections 5.2, 6, 7, 8), ADR-001
+
+## Context
+
+EPPP is a greenfield personal blogging platform (ADR-001) whose runtime is a
+single modular-monolith application plus an optional worker, deployed as one
+or more containers of one image. The whole platform — public server, admin
+API, rendering pipeline, extension runtime, core services and background
+jobs — executes on one runtime, so the runtime choice is a platform-wide,
+hard-to-reverse decision with security, tooling and operational reach.
+
+The workspace is a pnpm monorepo (pnpm 11.23.0) whose root manifest already
+declares `engines.node: ">=24.0.0 <25.0.0"` with `engineStrict: true`, and
+the CI pipeline installs and runs on Node 24 (E00-S01-T08). The technology
+stack wiki classifies Node.js as support class A — a fixed upstream EOL date
+— and pins the golden compatibility tuple to Node 24.19.0 LTS (Krypton), with
+`node:24.19.0-bookworm-slim` as the application container base image.
+
+## Decision
+
+EPPP runs on the **Node.js 24 LTS** runtime line, exact-pinned to Node 24.19.0
+LTS (Krypton) in the golden compatibility tuple and the container image. The
+workspace root manifest restricts the engine to 24.x
+(`engines.node: ">=24.0.0 <25.0.0"`), pnpm enforces it at install time
+(`engineStrict: true`), and CI installs and runs on Node 24. The runtime is a
+class A dependency: its upstream EOL (2028-04-30) drives the upgrade
+schedule, and a move to a later major line (for example Node 26) is only
+evaluated once that line is LTS and the compatibility suite passes, and then
+only as a deliberate, ADR-recorded change. The decision text — **Node.js 24
+LTS runtime** — matches the ADR index entry (ADR-002, section 70).
+
+## Alternatives
+
+- **Node 22 LTS (Jod)** — rejected: it is the previous LTS line and reaches
+  EOL before Node 24 (2027-04-30), shortening the runway for a platform whose
+  v1.1 boundary contracts (ADR-027 to ADR-032) extend past that date.
+- **Node 26 (current, non-LTS at decision time)** — rejected: not LTS when
+  the decision was made; running a non-LTS line contradicts the class A
+  support posture (fixed EOL, security patching on an LTS cadence).
+- **Node 24 with no exact pin (floating latest 24.x)** — rejected: a floating
+  minor would break the reproducibility of the golden compatibility tuple and
+  the container image; the line is pinned and minors move deliberately.
+- **Node 24 LTS, exact-pinned 24.19.0** — chosen: an LTS major with a fixed
+  EOL, exact-pinned in the image and tuple, engine-restricted in the
+  manifest, and enforced in CI.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- Positive: an LTS line with a fixed upstream EOL (2028-04-30) gives a
+  predictable security-patching and upgrade horizon; the exact pin makes
+  builds and containers reproducible; the engine restriction rejects
+  unsupported Node versions at install time instead of failing at runtime.
+- Negative: Node 24 API and behaviour become the platform floor — anything
+  needing a newer Node feature waits for the deliberate, ADR-recorded major
+  upgrade; minor upgrades inside 24.x still need the weekly dependency sweep
+  and full CI.
+- Neutral: the runtime is shared by every module, so a future extraction
+  (ADR-001) keeps running on the same Node line until that module's runtime
+  needs diverge.
+
+## Operational impact
+
+- Application and worker containers run `node:24.19.0-bookworm-slim`; release
+  automation records the immutable image digest in the SBOM/release manifest.
+- The supported runtime is enforced at install (`engineStrict: true` fails
+  installs on unsupported Node) and at test time (the node-engine suite
+  asserts the current runtime satisfies the 24.x range).
+- CI installs and runs every stage on Node 24, so the committed pipeline is
+  the operational proof that the platform runs on the chosen line.
+- Node 24 is patched on the LTS cadence; security-emergency updates go
+  through the focused lane (immediate, full CI), and the EOL date is the
+  deadline for the next major-line ADR.
+
+## Revisit trigger
+
+- Revisit when Node 26 becomes LTS and passes the compatibility suite, per
+  the LTS strategy — the decision to move majors is a new ADR, not a patch.
+- Revisit on a security-emergency or patch-lane event that forces a minor
+  upgrade outside the weekly sweep, or if upstream announces a change to the
+  Node 24 support horizon.
+- Revisit if a module's runtime needs (ADR-001 extraction) diverge from the
+  shared Node line and a second runtime enters the platform.

docs/adr/ADR-003-typescript-6-0-3.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+# ADR-003: TypeScript 6.0.3 language decision
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-31
+- Deciders: platform stream
+- References: ADR index (section 70), Technology stack wiki (sections 5.2, 6, 7, 8), ADR-001
+
+## Context
+
+EPPP is a modular monolith (ADR-001) written in TypeScript across every
+module boundary: `apps/`, `packages/` and `extensions/` are all compiled from
+strict TypeScript against a shared base tsconfig (E00-S01-T10). The language
+version is therefore a platform-wide decision: it fixes the type-system
+features, the compiler behaviour and the toolchain (editor, build, CI
+typecheck) every module sees.
+
+The workspace already pins TypeScript exactly: the root manifest declares
+`devDependencies.typescript: "6.0.3"` (a bare MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, no semver
+range), the committed lockfile resolves exactly one `typescript@6.0.3`, and
+every workspace package resolves `Version 6.0.3` (E00-S01-T09). The
+technology stack wiki classifies TypeScript as support class C — rolling,
+exact-pinned, tested and upgraded deliberately — and pins 6.0.3 in the golden
+compatibility tuple. TypeScript 7.0 reached GA in 2026-07 without a stable
+programmatic API before 7.1, making 6.0 the bridge release.
+
+## Decision
+
+EPPP uses **TypeScript 6.0.3** as its language and compiler, exact-pinned in
+the root manifest and the lockfile so every workspace package and every CI
+typecheck runs the identical compiler. 6.0.3 is the baseline; a formal review
+happens after TS 7.1 is stable (per the technology stack LTS strategy), and
+any move to the 7.x line is a deliberate, ADR-recorded change. The decision
+text — **TypeScript 6.0.3 pending TS7.1 ecosystem review** — matches the ADR
+index entry (ADR-003, section 70).
+
+## Alternatives
+
+- **TypeScript 7.0 at GA (2026-07)** — rejected: it shipped without a stable
+  programmatic API before 7.1, which would put the compiler toolchain on an
+  unstable surface; 6.0 is the documented bridge.
+- **TypeScript 6.x floating (caret/range)** — rejected: a range could resolve
+  to a different compiler than the one the golden tuple was tested with; the
+  exact pin is what makes typecheck deterministic across modules and CI.
+- **TypeScript 5.x (previous major)** — rejected: it predates the 6.0 type
+  system and ecosystem position the platform was bootstrapped on; staying on
+  an older major only delays the bridge.
+- **TypeScript 6.0.3 exact-pinned** — chosen: the bridge release, exact-pinned
+  and CI-verified, with a formal re-review once TS 7.1 stabilises the
+  programmatic API.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- Positive: one exact compiler version across apps, packages and extensions
+  makes typecheck results reproducible locally and in CI; the 6.0 bridge is a
+  known-good stepping stone to the 7.x line; strict mode across the workspace
+  stays uniform.
+- Negative: the language feature set is fixed at 6.0.3 until the reviewed
+  upgrade; any tooling that needs the 7.x programmatic API waits for the TS
+  7.1 formal review.
+- Neutral: upgrades inside the pinned major remain controlled by the
+  dependency sweep; the language choice is invisible to the deployed runtime
+  (TypeScript compiles away) but is enforced at build and typecheck time.
+
+## Operational impact
+
+- `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile` resolves exactly `typescript@6.0.3`; the
+  lockfile contains one resolved TypeScript entry, so no package can drift
+  onto another version.
+- Every workspace `build`/`typecheck` script invokes the pinned compiler
+  (`pnpm exec tsc`), and the typescript-pin suite asserts each package
+  resolves `Version 6.0.3`.
+- CI stage 2 (typecheck) runs `pnpm typecheck` across the workspace, so the
+  language pin is continuously verified on every pull request.
+- A TypeScript upgrade is a class C lane change: patch/minor through the
+  sweep with full CI; the 7.x major is a programme item with its own ADR.
+
+## Revisit trigger
+
+- Revisit after TypeScript 7.1 is stable: the formal review (per the LTS
+  strategy) decides whether the platform moves to the 7.x line, recorded as a
+  new ADR.
+- Revisit if a workspace package needs a type-system feature or toolchain
+  capability that 6.0.3 cannot provide, or if the ecosystem (editors, tools,
+  type packages) leaves the 6.0 bridge unsupported.
+- Revisit if a module boundary contract (ADR-027 to ADR-032) becomes
+  unrepresentable in the pinned type system.

docs/adr/ADR-004-fastify-5-http-runtime.md

@@ -0,0 +1,136 @@
+# ADR-004: Fastify 5 HTTP runtime
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-31
+- Deciders: platform stream
+- References: ADR index (section 70), Technology stack wiki (sections 5.2, 6,
+  7, 8), Architecture wiki (sections 1, 19, 42), ADR-001, ADR-002
+
+## Context
+
+EPPP is a modular monolith (ADR-001) whose single application image contains
+the public server, admin API, rendering pipeline, extension runtime and core
+services. Every inbound request — public pages, the admin API and the
+health/readiness endpoints — enters the platform through one HTTP runtime, so
+the runtime choice is a platform-wide, hard-to-reverse decision with security,
+tooling and operational reach.
+
+The public rendering pipeline is already documented as starting at the HTTP
+layer — `Fastify route → SiteResolver → VisitorPreferenceResolver →
+ContentService → PageComposition + BlockRegistry → ThemeResolver → React DOM
+server renderer → HTML` (Architecture wiki §19) — and the v0.1 public surface
+(§42) exposes `GET /`, `GET /posts/:slug`, `GET /assets/*`, `GET /media/*`,
+`GET /health/live`, `GET /health/ready` and `GET /admin/*`, all served by the
+HTTP runtime.
+
+The choice is already recorded higher up: ADR-001 fixes the runtime as
+"Node.js 24 LTS with Fastify 5" and ADR-002 records the Node line. The
+technology stack wiki pins **Fastify 5.12.1** in the golden compatibility
+tuple (§7) as support class B — a documented support policy with no fixed
+multi-year EOL date (§5.2) — and lists the approved Fastify lifecycle
+plugins: `@fastify/cookie` 11.1.2, `helmet` 13.1.1, `@fastify/rate-limit`
+11.2.0, `@fastify/static` 10.1.3, `@fastify/csrf-protection` 8.0.1,
+`@fastify/swagger` 9.8.1, with `@fastify/multipart` 10.1.1 behind a CI gate
+(§5.2).
+
+The workspace currently boots a minimal `node:http` server for the health
+endpoint (E00-S02-T03) — explicitly documented as a bootstrap until "the
+Fastify 5 application shell (and the real HTTP API) lands in a later story" —
+so this ADR formalises the committed runtime decision ahead of that shell.
+
+## Decision
+
+EPPP serves all inbound HTTP on the **Fastify 5 HTTP runtime**, exact-pinned
+to Fastify 5.12.1 in the golden compatibility tuple (Technology stack §7).
+One Fastify 5 application hosts the public routes, the admin API under
+`/api/admin/v1/*` and the health/readiness endpoints; the temporary
+`node:http` bootstrap is replaced when the Fastify 5 application shell lands
+in a later story.
+
+Fastify's plugin encapsulation matches the platform's module-boundary
+discipline (ADR-001): the approved plugin set is the Fastify lifecycle list
+in the technology stack (§5.2) — cookie, helmet, rate-limit, static,
+csrf-protection, swagger, with multipart gated in CI before enabling — and
+Fastify's native Pino 10.3.1 logger is the platform logger (the existing
+secret-redaction requirement, E00-S04-T03, carries over).
+
+Fastify is support class B: it has no fixed upstream EOL, and an upgrade to
+Fastify 6 is a deliberate, ADR-recorded major change gated on a stable v6,
+all required plugins compatible, the full suite green, and extension
+contracts stable/migrated (§6). The decision text — **Fastify 5 HTTP
+runtime** — matches the ADR index entry (ADR-004, section 70).
+
+## Alternatives
+
+- **Express (4.x/5.x)** — rejected: the middleware-chain model has no
+  first-class request/response schema validation or serialization, which
+  conflicts with the JSON Schema + TypeBox + Ajv validation decision
+  (ADR-011); plugin encapsulation and lifecycle hooks are weaker than
+  Fastify's, and the community middleware surface is less uniform to pin.
+- **Hono** — rejected: it is oriented toward edge/serverless runtimes, which
+  conflicts with the long-lived process model, background jobs and
+  connection-backed PostgreSQL access chosen in ADR-001; the golden tuple and
+  extension contracts were bootstrapped on Fastify.
+- **Koa** — rejected: the minimal core requires assembling routing, body
+  parsing, validation, security headers and logging by hand, adding glue code
+  with no schema-based validation story.
+- **Bare `node:http`** — rejected for the real API: it is only the temporary
+  health bootstrap (E00-S02-T03); it provides no routing, plugin lifecycle,
+  validation or the ecosystem the v0.1 public surface (§42) needs.
+- **Fastify 5** — chosen: schema-based validation and serialization aligns
+  with ADR-011, plugin encapsulation matches the module boundaries (ADR-001),
+  Pino logging is native, TypeScript support is first-class, and the
+  lifecycle plugin set is already pinned in the stack (§5.2).
+
+## Consequences
+
+- Positive: schema-based request/response validation and serialization aligns
+  with the ADR-011 decision (JSON Schema + TypeBox + Ajv); plugin
+  encapsulation gives each plugin an isolated scope, matching the
+  module-boundary discipline of ADR-001; the runtime is already the documented
+  choice in ADR-001 and the golden tuple, so no rework is needed when the
+  application shell lands; native Pino 10.3.1 logging integrates with the
+  existing redaction requirement (E00-S04-T03); the pinned lifecycle plugin
+  set covers the v0.1 needs — cookies/opaque DB-backed sessions (ADR-019),
+  security headers, rate limiting, static assets/media and swagger docs.
+- Negative: Fastify 5 is class B — no fixed upstream EOL date, so the support
+  horizon is policy-defined rather than date-defined; the exact pin (5.12.1)
+  must move deliberately through the dependency lanes; the application shell
+  does not exist yet, so this ADR commits a decision whose implementation
+  lands in a later story (the `node:http` bootstrap remains until then).
+- Neutral: Fastify is an in-process library, so a future module extraction
+  (ADR-001) does not change the shared HTTP runtime unless that module needs
+  its own runtime; plugin majors move through the update lanes like any class
+  B dependency.
+
+## Operational impact
+
+- One Fastify 5 process serves the public routes, admin API and
+  health/readiness endpoints; it binds the validated `HOST`/`PORT` from the
+  config adapter (E00-S04-T04).
+- Health/readiness remain part of the v0.1 surface (`GET /health/live`,
+  `GET /health/ready`, Architecture wiki §42) with readiness gated on
+  migration completion (E00-S03-T06).
+- All log output continues through the redacting-logger pattern (E00-S04-T03);
+  Fastify's native Pino logger is configured with the same redaction.
+- The security posture comes from the approved plugin set: helmet (headers),
+  csrf-protection (state-changing requests), rate-limit (abuse), cookie
+  (opaque DB-backed admin sessions, ADR-019), static (assets/media) and
+  swagger (API docs).
+- Deploy/rollback is unchanged: the HTTP runtime lives inside the single
+  application image (ADR-001), so rollback is redeploying the previous image.
+- Fastify patch/minor upgrades go through the weekly dependency sweep with
+  full CI; a Fastify 6 major is a programme item (ADR + compatibility + full
+  suite + plugin migration, §6/§8).
+
+## Revisit trigger
+
+- Revisit when Fastify 6 is stable, all required lifecycle plugins are
+  compatible, the full suite is green and the extension contracts are
+  stable/migrated — per the LTS strategy (§6) the move to v6 is a new ADR, not
+  a patch.
+- Revisit if the Fastify 5 support policy changes (class B has no fixed EOL
+  date), or if a required plugin forces a Fastify major earlier than planned.
+- Revisit if the Fastify 5 application shell, when it lands, cannot satisfy
+  the v0.1 public surface (§42) or the v1.1 boundary contracts (ADR-027 to
+  ADR-032) — for example, a hard requirement Fastify 5 cannot meet.

docs/adr/ADR-006-kysely-contained-inside-db-adapter.md

@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
+# ADR-006: Kysely contained inside DB adapter
+
+- Status: Accepted
+- Date: 2026-08-31
+- Deciders: platform stream
+- References: ADR-001, ADR-005, Architecture wiki (sections 1, 4, 9),
+  Engineering-Standards wiki (sections 24, 25, 57)
+
+## Context
+
+EPPP is a modular monolith (ADR-001) that keeps every module boundary
+explicit, versioned and CI-enforced. ADR-005 already records the database
+choice — PostgreSQL 18 as the sole canonical database — and with it the rule
+that the `pg` driver and the Kysely query builder are isolated to
+`packages/database-postgres`, the adapter boundary every database access
+passes through. This ADR is the focused record of where the query builder
+itself may live: the containment decision.
+
+Kysely is a type-safe SQL query builder, not an ORM. It gives typed queries
+and composable expressions on top of `pg`, but it still speaks SQL and a
+dialect, and every package that imports it is coupled to that dialect and to
+the adapter's implementation choices. The workspace already depends on the
+containment: `packages/database-postgres` declares `kysely` 0.29.4 and `pg`
+8.22.0 as its exact-pinned runtime dependencies (its only ones), imports them
+in its source and re-exports the pieces the adapter is built on (E00-S03-T02),
+and is the single workspace package whose source may import the driver — a
+rule locked in by `tests/database-postgres-imports.test.mjs` in the
+`database-postgres-imports` CI job and by the architecture fitness tests
+FIT-010 (browser bundles cannot import server/DB packages) and FIT-011 (UI
+cannot import Kysely/pg).
+
+The dependency direction is already fixed: `database-postgres → core ports →
+Kysely/pg` (Architecture wiki §9.1, Engineering-Standards §24). Domain and
+extension packages talk to the database through core repository/port
+interfaces, never through the query builder. What remains to be recorded is
+that this is a standing architectural decision, not a temporary arrangement:
+Kysely stays inside the adapter, and no other package may grow a Kysely or
+`pg` import surface.
+
+## Decision
+
+EPPP keeps **Kysely contained inside DB adapter**. Kysely is an
+implementation detail of `packages/database-postgres` — the single workspace
+package allowed to import `pg`/Kysely (E00-S03-T02) — and the rest of the
+workspace reaches the database exclusively through the adapter's and core
+ports' APIs. No other workspace package may declare `kysely` or `pg` in its
+manifest or import them directly in its source; the `database-postgres-imports`
+CI gate plus FIT-010/FIT-011 enforce this on every PR. Kysely exists only
+where the adapter lives — it is contained, not distributed, and the containment
+is a package-level rule, not a type-level one.
+
+## Alternatives
+
+- **Kysely imported directly by domain/extension packages** — rejected: it
+  would leak SQL-dialect and query-builder concerns into domain and extension
+  code, defeat the single-owner boundary (E00-S03-T02), make FIT-011
+  impossible to honour, and couple business logic to the adapter's
+  implementation.
+- **A dedicated shared query-layer package** — rejected: it would create a
+  second import surface for the driver stack, split ownership of the dialect,
+  and add a package whose only purpose is to widen the boundary; the adapter
+  already owns the typed surface callers need.
+- **Full ORM (e.g. Prisma/Drizzle) instead of a query builder** — rejected:
+  schema is owned by the adapter's migration chains (ADR-005,
+  Engineering-Standards §25), and an ORM adds code generation and a schema
+  file that would couple domain models to storage; Kysely's typed builder is
+  sufficient and stays contained.
+- **Raw `pg` everywhere / no query builder** — rejected: hand-written SQL
+  loses type safety and composability while still requiring the driver;
+  containing a query builder is strictly better than containing SQL strings.
+- **Adapter re-exports Kysely for other packages to build queries** — rejected
+  (variant of the first alternative): even when routed through the adapter,
+  letting other packages compose Kysely queries would leak the dialect and
+  bypass the port/repository API that keeps domain code storage-agnostic.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- Positive: one owner for the whole driver/query-builder stack — upgrade,
+  dialect and typing decisions live in `packages/database-postgres` and are
+  exact-pinned single-manifest changes, so replacing or upgrading Kysely and
+  `pg` touches exactly one manifest; domain and extension code stays
+  driver-free, so FIT-010/FIT-011 hold; replacing Kysely or the dialect later
+  is a contained change behind the adapter boundary (consistent with the
+  ADR-005 encapsulation).
+- Negative: the adapter's port/repository API must be designed well enough
+  that domain code never needs the query builder — the port API is mandatory,
+  not optional; Kysely conveniences (expression builders, plugin features) are
+  not available to callers outside the adapter; the adapter package grows as
+  the query surface grows.
+- Neutral: Kysely remains a dependency of the adapter package only; contracts
+  between core ports and the adapter are plain TypeScript interfaces, so the
+  containment stays a package-level rule and never becomes a type-level one.
+
+## Operational impact
+
+- `kysely` and `pg` appear in exactly one manifest
+  (`packages/database-postgres/package.json`) and in exactly one package's
+  source; a static scan in `tests/database-postgres-imports.test.mjs`
+  (`database-postgres-imports` CI job) proves it on every PR, including a
+  mutation probe that fails when a driver import is injected elsewhere.
+- Upgrading Kysely or `pg` is a single-manifest change inside the adapter,
+  reviewed under the workspace's dependency/upgrade lane; no other package's
+  manifest or code moves.
+- No new runtime services, no schema changes, no deployment or configuration
+  impact: this ADR is documentation of an already-enforced boundary.
+
+## Revisit trigger
+
+- Revisit this ADR when a non-adapter package demonstrably needs
+  query-builder features that cannot be expressed through the adapter/port
+  API, and there is evidence (per the architecture review gates) that the
+  boundary costs more than containment saves.
+- Revisit if the platform grows additional data stores or engines (shared with
+  the ADR-005 revisit trigger): a second engine may need its own contained
+  adapter, and the query-builder containment rule would extend per adapter.
+- Revisit if the dependency-boundary enforcement changes — for example if
+  FIT-010/FIT-011 or the `database-postgres-imports` gate are relaxed or
+  re-scoped.