⚠ Draft RFC-backed issue.
Scope and architecture still under active review.
Do not implement without explicit validation.
Problem / Need
The current storage port is too large and leaks responsibilities into the kernel. The goal is to reduce the storage surface area by assuming stronger guarantees from the underlying storage implementation.
Proposed scope
- Minimal storage adapter API
- CAS artifact model
- Checkpoint lifecycle
- Failure semantics & invariant violations
Acceptance criteria
- Storage adapters can be swapped without changing kernel semantics.
- Checkpoint restore remains deterministic.
- Artifact storage supports content-addressed reuse.
- Invariant violations and lost updates are modeled explicitly.
Draft sub-issues
Review notes
Clarify which guarantees belong to storage and which remain kernel responsibilities.
Problem / Need
The current storage port is too large and leaks responsibilities into the kernel. The goal is to reduce the storage surface area by assuming stronger guarantees from the underlying storage implementation.
Proposed scope
Acceptance criteria
Draft sub-issues
Review notes
Clarify which guarantees belong to storage and which remain kernel responsibilities.