[Soushi888]

SoushAI analysis. Drafted by Soushi's AI assistant, reviewed and posted by @Soushi888.

Stacked on #171. Review only this layer's diff; everything below belongs to the parent PR.

Summary

This records the 2026-11-03 decision that work contexts live in the group DHT, not in a DNA of their own, as ADR-014, so the reasoning does not exist only in a session.

• The decision. Work contexts are entries of the group cell in standalone and in Moss. The Group DNA stays in both modes, and in Moss there is one Nondominium group per Moss group: the group cell of the tool instance, joined automatically with no invite code, with the Moss group above it as the federation layer.
• The rejected option. The dedicated work-context DNA leaned ahead on 27 Oct, because Moss was expected to replace our groups. With the Group DNA kept in both modes that premise is gone, and a separate network would split the project layer from the NDO anchors it refers to. The ADR also says what the choice gives up.
• The Moss mapping. A table maps each Moss concept (group, tool instance, join, profile, network seed) to its Nondominium counterpart and to the standalone equivalent. The NDO is the bridge between the modes.
• Consequences, and what is still open. The group cell is the seam for v0.2. Adding work-context entry types to the Group DNA changes its DNA hash, so v0.2 either recreates the pilot groups or v0.1.0 ships the types dormant. That and five other points are the open questions on docs(requirements): add group model requirements for Moss and standalone #171 and its board; the ADR lists them without settling them.

lobby-architecture.md §9, whose Moss feature map assumed Moss replaces the Group DNA, gets a one-line note pointing to the ADR.

Changes by concern

The ADR (documentation/specifications/adr/ADR-014-work-contexts-in-group-dht.md), in the format of ADR-010 to ADR-013: context, decision, rejected alternative, Moss mapping, consequences, open questions, where it lives in code. Every file path and manifest field it names was read in the repo.

Superseded note in documentation/specifications/lobby-architecture.md §9. REQ-XCUT-02 was already reworded in #171.

Index. documentation/DOCUMENTATION_INDEX.md lists ADR-014 next to ADR-010 to ADR-013, and requirements.md §2.4 (from #171) now links to it.

Decisions

Option	Rejected because
A dedicated work-context DNA	Its premise, that Moss replaces our groups, is gone; it would split projects from the NDO anchors in the group DHT; it adds a cell per work context; and it keeps two architectures where the decision is one.

One claim in the ADR is my reasoning, not a measurement: that an added cell per work context costs the agent a provision, a join and a sync. The ADR says so.

How to test

Docs only, no code and no build. Read the ADR against workdir/happ.yaml and dnas/group/zomes/integrity/zome_group_integrity/src/lib.rs, which it cites, and against the REQ ids it names, which are defined in #171.

Documentation

Added documentation/specifications/adr/ADR-014-work-contexts-in-group-dht.md. Updated documentation/specifications/lobby-architecture.md (superseded note), documentation/DOCUMENTATION_INDEX.md and documentation/requirements/requirements.md (link to the ADR).

Pre-open review

READY TO OPEN. Branch is stacked on docs/167-group-model-requirements and merges with no conflict. Docs only. Checked: the ADR's code references match the repo (group and ndo roles deferred with clone limits 64 and 512, the five group entry types, ndo_anchor.rs); every REQ id it names is defined in #171; the DNA-hash claim matches the Holochain reference that integrity code is part of the DNA hash; no em-dash or double hyphen; one source line per paragraph; Valueflows spelled correctly. No question is settled in the ADR that belongs to Soushi.

Related

Closes #168

• Depends on: docs(requirements): group model requirements for Moss and standalone #167, through docs(requirements): add group model requirements for Moss and standalone #171 (this PR is stacked on it).

[Soushi888]

SoushAI analysis. Drafted by Soushi's AI assistant, reviewed and posted by @Soushi888.

Review APPROVE at head a9dc811 (the head after #171 merged and GitHub rebased this layer onto dev), merging under Soushi's explicit -mwr authorisation (2026-11-03 21:42).

• Docs only: ADR-014, the superseded note in lobby-architecture.md §9, the index row and the requirements.md §2.4 link. The ADR's code references (group and ndo roles, group entry types, ndo_anchor.rs) match the paths the body says were read. No em-dash or double hyphen in added text.
• CI at this head: build, rustfmt, all six Sweettest shards and e2e are SUCCESS. Branch is mergeable and clean against dev.
• The ADR lists the open questions from docs(requirements): add group model requirements for Moss and standalone #171 without settling them, as the body says.