Record Architecture Decisions

Status

Accepted

Context

We need to record the architectural decisions made on our ShopFlow e-commerce platform project. Architecture decisions are important for:

• Understanding the reasoning behind current system design
• Onboarding new team members effectively
• Avoiding repeated discussions on settled matters
• Learning from past decisions and their outcomes
• Maintaining consistency in architectural approach

We have been making architecture decisions throughout the project, but we have not been recording them systematically. This has led to:

• Lost context about why certain decisions were made
• Repeated debates about previously settled architectural choices
• Difficulty for new team members to understand system rationale
• Inconsistent decision-making processes across the team

We considered several alternatives for recording decisions:

• Confluence/Wiki pages - tend to become outdated and disconnected from code
• Code comments - limited space and not suitable for broader architectural context
• Meeting minutes - scattered across multiple documents and hard to find
• Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) - lightweight, version-controlled, close to code

Decision

We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) to record architecture decisions, following the format standardized at adr.github.io.

We will:

• Keep ADRs in the repository as Markdown files under adr/
• Number ADRs sequentially (0001, 0002, etc.)
• Use the standard ADR format: Status, Context, Decision, Consequences
• Include C4 model diagrams using Mermaid syntax where helpful for visualization
• Update the main README with an ADR index for easy navigation
• Review ADRs during code review process to ensure quality and completeness

Consequences

Positive:

• Architecture decisions will be documented and easily accessible
• New team members can understand the reasoning behind current architecture
• We avoid repeating discussions on settled architectural matters
• Decision rationale is preserved for future reference
• ADRs are version-controlled alongside the code they describe

Negative:

• Additional overhead to document decisions
• Team must remember to create ADRs for significant architectural choices
• Need to maintain discipline to keep ADRs up to date

Neutral:

• ADRs become part of our development workflow
• We need to establish criteria for what constitutes an "architectural decision"
• Regular review of ADR status may be needed to deprecate outdated decisions

This ADR establishes the foundation for architectural decision documentation in our project.