Skip to content

1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2026-01-01

Status

Accepted

Context

As the Rhiza project grows and evolves, we need a systematic way to document important architectural and design decisions. Team members (both current and future) need to understand:

  • Why certain approaches were chosen over alternatives
  • What constraints or requirements influenced past decisions
  • The expected consequences of architectural choices
  • The historical context behind the current system design

Without such documentation, we risk: - Repeating past mistakes or debates - Making inconsistent decisions across the project - Losing institutional knowledge when team members change - Spending time explaining the same decisions repeatedly

Decision

We will maintain Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) for architecturally significant decisions in the project.

Key aspects:

  1. Location: ADRs will be stored in docs/adr/ directory
  2. Format: Each ADR will follow the template defined in 0000-adr-template.md
  3. Naming: Files will be named XXXX-title-with-hyphens.md with sequential 4-digit numbering (e.g., 0002-example-decision.md)
  4. Index: The docs/adr/README.md will maintain an index of all ADRs
  5. Immutability: Once accepted, ADRs should not be modified; instead, create new ADRs that supersede old ones
  6. Review: ADRs should be reviewed and discussed before being marked as "Accepted"

What qualifies as an ADR-worthy decision:

  • Changes to the project structure or organization
  • Technology or tool adoption/removal
  • Significant changes to development workflows or processes
  • Design patterns or architectural approaches
  • Changes to build, test, or deployment strategies

Consequences

Positive

  • Knowledge preservation: Important decisions and their rationale are documented for future reference
  • Better onboarding: New contributors can understand why things work the way they do
  • Reduced debate: Past decisions are clearly documented, reducing repetitive discussions
  • Audit trail: Clear history of architectural evolution
  • Better decision-making: Forces thoughtful consideration of context and consequences

Neutral

  • Process overhead: Contributors need to write ADRs for significant decisions (but this is offset by reduced future confusion)
  • Learning curve: Team members need to learn when and how to write ADRs

Negative

  • Initial setup time: Creating the ADR system and first records requires upfront effort
  • Maintenance: The ADR index needs to be kept up-to-date

Overall, the benefits of maintaining ADRs far outweigh the minimal overhead required to keep them up-to-date.