Ren Finlayson
539852f81c
Some checks are pending
CodeQL / Analyze (csharp) (push) Waiting to run
CodeQL / Analyze (python) (push) Waiting to run
dotnet-build-and-test / paths-filter (push) Waiting to run
dotnet-build-and-test / dotnet-build-and-test (Debug, windows-latest, net9.0) (push) Blocked by required conditions
dotnet-build-and-test / dotnet-build-and-test (Release, integration, true, ubuntu-latest, net10.0) (push) Blocked by required conditions
dotnet-build-and-test / dotnet-build-and-test (Release, integration, true, windows-latest, net472) (push) Blocked by required conditions
dotnet-build-and-test / dotnet-build-and-test (Release, ubuntu-latest, net8.0) (push) Blocked by required conditions
dotnet-build-and-test / dotnet-build-and-test-check (push) Blocked by required conditions
25 lines
1.8 KiB
Markdown
25 lines
1.8 KiB
Markdown
# Architectural Decision Records (ADRs)
|
|
|
|
An Architectural Decision (AD) is a justified software design choice that addresses a functional or non-functional requirement that is architecturally significant. An Architectural Decision Record (ADR) captures a single AD and its rationale.
|
|
|
|
For more information [see](https://adr.github.io/)
|
|
|
|
## How are we using ADRs to track technical decisions?
|
|
|
|
1. Copy docs/decisions/adr-template.md to docs/decisions/NNNN-title-with-dashes.md, where NNNN indicates the next number in sequence.
|
|
1. Check for existing PR's to make sure you use the correct sequence number.
|
|
2. There is also a short form template docs/decisions/adr-short-template.md
|
|
2. Edit NNNN-title-with-dashes.md.
|
|
1. Status must initially be `proposed`
|
|
2. List of `deciders` must include the github ids of the people who will sign off on the decision.
|
|
3. The relevant EM and architect must be listed as deciders or informed of all decisions.
|
|
4. You should list the names or github ids of all partners who were consulted as part of the decision.
|
|
5. Keep the list of `deciders` short. You can also list people who were `consulted` or `informed` about the decision.
|
|
3. For each option list the good, neutral and bad aspects of each considered alternative.
|
|
1. Detailed investigations can be included in the `More Information` section inline or as links to external documents.
|
|
4. Share your PR with the deciders and other interested parties.
|
|
1. Deciders must be listed as required reviewers.
|
|
2. The status must be updated to `accepted` once a decision is agreed and the date must also be updated.
|
|
3. Approval of the decision is captured using PR approval.
|
|
5. Decisions can be changed later and superseded by a new ADR. In this case it is useful to record any negative outcomes in the original ADR.
|