I wrote storage law before I wrote storage code

I wrote storage law before I wrote storage code.

That sounds excessive — right up to the point where you find model weights sitting in the wrong place for weeks and realise the system never had a rule against it. That's how my storage constitution started.

Mountpoints are the contract. Storage classes are a closed set. Drift is recorded and reconciled, not quietly absorbed into "current reality." Many teams skip this because it looks like paperwork. It isn't paperwork. It's the difference between an infrastructure decision and an infrastructure accident. Flexible vs governable. Convenient vs auditable. I prefer the second side of both.

Once AI agents touch your infrastructure, sloppy storage semantics stop being a minor ops smell and become a prompt-quality problem. If the underlying contract is vague, the agent acts confidently inside that vagueness. That's not intelligence — it's automation with better grammar.

So yes, I wrote the law first. It was cheaper than rediscovering the same failure later with more data attached to it.

What's one infrastructure rule your team keeps in people's heads that probably deserves to be written down as law?

Governance built in is what VigyanBytes does — on-prem or cloud, with a record of every action. If your AI is touching systems nobody can fully audit, that's a conversation worth having.