Define the materialization-unit apply, observe, and evidence lifecycle

[Brad-Edwards]

Goal

Give every typed materialization unit a common, fail-closed lifecycle from plan through apply, observation, evidence publication, teardown, and recovery.

This builds on the materialization-unit contract. It is the reusable proof mechanism that lets APTL say which RAES declaration actually happened, rather than inferring success from container existence.

Scope

Define and implement the shared lifecycle state model and transitions for a selected unit:

planned → applying → applied → observing → verified | failed → tearing_down → torn_down

The contract must accommodate provider-specific implementation while retaining one canonical result/evidence shape.

Acceptance criteria

• A unit cannot be reported as verified until the selected realizer supplies declaration-appropriate observed evidence.
• Evidence binds unit identity, RAES declaration pointer, admitted pack/kit provenance, selected artifact, parameter-safe configuration identity, timestamps, and observation outcome.
• Apply, retry, failure, partial failure, recovery, and teardown transitions are explicit, durable, and idempotent where safe.
• Unsupported or unobserved surfaces produce a structured failure or an explicitly incomplete result; neither can be promoted to proof.
• Secret values and protected operator material are excluded from evidence while references/identity remain auditable.
• Existing APTL evidence and realization records are adapted to the common lifecycle rather than shadowed.
• Tests cover success, failed observation, interrupted apply/recovery, teardown, and evidence redaction.

Non-goals

• Kit-specific provisioning logic.
• Claiming cross-kit application integration without an authored RAES relationship and observed proof.