A review pass over the plan committed in c1ce262f, against the code rather than
against the plan's own reasoning. Five things it left open, and three smaller
ones.
**Key packages are one-time-use, and the plan discovered that at step 4.**
`NostrDao` marks a bundle `consumed = true` as the device processes its own
Welcome, and `MarmotKeyPackageBundleDao` only ever returns one that is neither
consumed nor rotated -- so every group a member joins burns one, and a member who
is in the parent and has not published since has none left. Phase 6 refuses to
create a room when any member's package is missing, correctly, because the id is
derived and a half-created room occupies that address permanently. But that
refusal landed after a ChillDKG, a parent quorum and a child quorum had all
completed, each of which needed every selected admin present. Availability is now
a property of the picker -- prefetched as the screen opens, the way group creation
already does it, with the member marked, unselectable, and told to publish a new
one -- and Phase 6's check is restated as the backstop it should always have been,
since a package can be consumed elsewhere between the two.
**Nothing said where the subgroup's name came from.** `createAdminGroup`
synthesises "X (#admins)" and gets away with it because a group has one admin
room; a group has many subgroups and "X (#subgroup)" names none of them. The
picker takes a required name, it travels to `MarmotGroupData`, and it is copied
into the certificate so the parent's admins approve something legible rather than
a hash. That freezes it, which is the right trade and is now written down: the
name and the `p` tags are the *founding* roster, `certifies` deliberately does not
check either, and the Phase 7 list titles a row from the room where it has one and
only otherwise from the certificate. A test that must pass -- a certificate whose
name and members no longer match the room's -- guards the roster check somebody
will otherwise add.
**The ceremony room arrived nameless on everybody else's device.**
`getOrCreateNip17ChatRoom` already reads `parseSubject()` off the payload and
`ChillDkgRitualManager.broadcast` writes no subject tag, so a selected admin
watches an unnamed room appear with a ceremony running in it. One tag on the
proposal, and worth fixing for robust-group creation in the same breath, where the
subject reaches only the creator's own device.
**`ChatRoom.parentChatRoomId` must not be a foreign key**, which the three
neighbouring tables make it natural to get wrong: they all declare
`ForeignKey(onDelete = CASCADE)` onto ChatRoom, and a self-referential one would
mean deleting a parent room deletes every subgroup beneath it and, by their own
cascades, those rooms' messages, participants, key states and signed events.
RESTRICT is not the answer either. The pointer routinely names a room this device
does not have -- a subgroup member who was never in the parent has the id and
nothing else -- so a dangling value is the normal state and resolution is a lookup
allowed to return null.
**The chronicle gap was named on the parent's side and missed on the child's.** A
member welcomed into a subgroup after founding holds no key state either, since
`adopt` files one only from the signed event, so their verified parent link is
null. `SharedKeyDerivation.describe` gains a parent line beside the path, which
reaches them in the Welcome through the epoch-0 group context -- explicitly a hint
written by the room's creator, never promoted into the verified column, and
subordinate to a real key state wherever one exists. Chronicling the certificate
is the upgrade for both faces of the gap, and the section says what it would
actually cost: an apply-order slot and a decision about whether a room's chronicle
may carry an event its own key did not sign, which no chroniclable kind does.
Three smaller ones. The coordinator is load-bearing only for step 1: after the
ceremony fixes the participant set, any parent admin can propose the certificate
and any child admin the key state and the room, so a coordinator who drops out
strands nothing -- and the UI should offer the rung to whoever can act rather than
to whoever started. Two coordinators racing produce two certificates sharing a `d`
tag, which is a replacement rather than an accumulation, and `certificateFor`
takes the newest that verifies. And Phase 8 gains refusal rows for a blank name
and for a member with no key package.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
mantra docs
Notes on the parts of this app whose behaviour is not recoverable by reading the code alone — where the reasoning lives in a protocol, a failure mode that is silent, or a decision that looked arbitrary and was not.
| document | covers |
|---|---|
| shared-key-ceremony.md | ChillDKG over NIP-17: the rounds, the approval gates, the chat transcript, participant ordering |
| shared-key-derivation.md | deriving further keys from the group's threshold key with FROST tweaks — why not BIP32, why no chain code, and the one rule that must not be broken |
| subgroups.md | a group making another group — the four ceremonies, what the parent's signature actually covers, and why the child's key is fresh rather than derived |
| frost-batch-signing.md | signing several events in one ceremony — why one nonce can never cover two messages, and the phased schema, wire and UI work that follows from it |
| marmot-membership.md | how members join an MLS group, and the epoch race that makes a missing member look like a successful invite |
| member-chronicle.md | handing a member added after the work was done the group's signed record — why the events are not on the wire at all, and why the room's id is enough to verify them |
| marmot-direct-messages.md | a one-to-one message inside a group as a stock NIP-59 gift wrap — what its MIP-03 carve-out costs, why the sender cannot read their own, and the one query that would broadcast it |
| mls-skipped-keys.md | why a group event that arrives a moment late is dropped for good, which flows trigger it, the quartz fix, and the partial mitigation in this app |
| long-running-sync.md | the chat subscriptions that stay open instead of pulling once per screen — why the request queue could not simply hold one, and how the group filter follows the room list |
| dead-code.md | code in the sync and relay stack that nothing calls, why each piece is still there, and which of it is a bug rather than a leftover |
| jvm-target.md | what desktop support cost, phased — why the native chain was already done, why an empty source set in our phoenix fork was the real blocker, and why DAO tests need none of it |
| material-design-conformance.md | what the M3 foundations actually require, measured against all 43 screens — the colour pairing that renders the app's own proposals invisible, and eight phases that put the decisions back in the theme |
Start with the ceremony if you are new to this area; the Marmot notes all assume it. Read the skipped-keys note before debugging any "the other device never got it" report — it is silent, and it looks like every other kind of delivery failure. The sync note stands alone, and the dead-code inventory reads as a follow-up to it. The batch-signing note is a phased plan that has been built: read it after the derivation note, whose one rule is the same one it is built around. The member chronicle note is a phased plan that has not been built, and reads as the membership note's unanswered half: what a member who joins late can be given, and the one thing they cannot. The jvm-target note is unrelated to all of them: it is a build and packaging story. The subgroups note is a phased plan that has not been built; it assumes both shared-key notes and reads as the ceremony's second half — what a group does once it has a key, and what it can say about a group that does not yet. The Material Design note is a phased plan that has not been built, and is the only one about what the app looks like rather than what it does; read the jvm-target note first if you want to know why its adaptive-layout phase exists.