Nodes offer an update when the signed catalog pins something newer than
what's running, and that machinery is fine. The missing step was the one
before it: nothing told *us* when upstream shipped. A pin could sit at
fedimintd v0.10.0 for months while every node in the fleet correctly and
confidently reported "up to date".
The reason nothing could tell us is that a manifest records only our
mirror — `source.archipelago-foundation.org/lfg2025/fedimintd:v0.10.0`
says nothing about the project it was mirrored from. So this adds an
optional `app.upstream` block naming the real source, and a script that
asks each one what it has released.
Running it answers the question that prompted this. Of 58 apps, 28 are
behind, including LND v0.18.4-beta against v0.21.2-beta, Bitcoin Core
28.4 against 31.1, and fedimintd/gatewayd v0.10.0 against v0.10.1.
Two choices worth stating. An app with no `upstream` block is reported
as UNTRACKED rather than skipped — a silent skip is how this stayed
invisible, and before this commit all 58 were silently skipped. And a
suggestion prefers our own tag variant: telling someone pinned to
`postgres:16.13-alpine` that the newest tag is `18.6-trixie` is true and
useless, because swapping the base image is a different decision from
bumping a version.
Five apps are deliberately left untracked (barkd, immich-postgres,
indeedhub-minio, lightning-stack, pine-whisper): I could not establish
their upstream with confidence, and a wrong `repo` produces a confident
wrong verdict, which is worse than an honest gap.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Small-disk nodes (<1000 GB data volume) keep the same dynamic
prune-vs-archival logic but now retain ~50 GB of recent blocks instead
of the bare 550 MB minimum. Takes effect for catalog-covered installs
at the next catalog regeneration + signing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
