Skip to content

ADR-0001: Record Architecture Decisions

Status

ACCEPTED

Date: 2025-07-05

Changelog

Date Revision Description Author
2025-07-05 1.0 Initial version souperk

Context

As our project grows, we need a systematic way to:

  • Document important architectural decisions
  • Provide context for past decisions to new team members
  • Track the evolution of our system's architecture
  • Make architectural decisions visible and transparent
  • Ensure consistent decision-making processes across the project

Currently, architectural decisions are either:

  • Not documented at all
  • Scattered across various communication channels (issues, PRs, discussions)
  • Documented inconsistently
  • Hard to find and reference later

Decision

We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) to document significant architectural decisions in our project.

Specifically:

  • ADRs will be stored in docs/adr/ directory
  • We will use a Markdown format following our established template
  • Each ADR will be numbered sequentially (NNNN format starting with 0001)
  • ADRs will be immutable once accepted (new ADRs will supersede old ones when needed)
  • All significant architectural decisions must be documented in an ADR
  • ADRs will be reviewed and approved through pull requests

We consider a decision "architecturally significant" if it:

  • Has a significant impact on the system structure
  • Affects multiple components or teams
  • Is difficult or expensive to change later
  • Introduces important technical constraints
  • Impacts system-wide quality attributes
  • Involves significant trade-offs

Consequences

Positive

  • Better documentation of architectural decisions and their context
  • Easier onboarding for new team members
  • Clear historical record of why certain choices were made
  • Improved the architectural decision-making process through a structured format
  • Easier to reference decisions in issues, PRs, and discussions
  • Forces careful consideration of architectural changes

Negative

  • Additional overhead for documenting decisions
  • Need to maintain discipline in creating and updating ADRs
  • Potential for over-documentation of minor decisions
  • May slow down the decision-making process

Neutral

  • Need to regularly review what constitutes an "architectural decision"
  • May need to adjust the template based on team feedback and usage
  • Will need to establish a review process for ADRs

Alternatives Considered

  1. Documentation Pages

    • Description: Using project documentation for architectural documentation
    • Pros:
      • More flexible format
      • Easier to update and maintain
    • Cons:
      • Less structured
      • Harder to track history
      • No clear review process
    • Not chosen because we need a more structured and immutable format

  2. Issue Tracker

    • Description: Using GitHub issues for architectural decisions
    • Pros:
      • Integrated with the existing workflow
      • Good discussion capabilities
    • Cons:
      • Hard to find historical decisions
      • No structured format
      • Mixed with other types of issues
    • Not chosen because we need a dedicated, structured format for architectural decisions

References