Add ADR for procedural device definition #12
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Fixes #9 |
callumforrester
approved these changes
Sep 12, 2023
|
going to rebase this on top of the recent changes, then happy to approve |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@DominicOram @callumforrester @RAYemelyanova @danielballan @mrakitin @prjemian @tacaswell I have discussed various parts of this with you at various times, and I decided to write down what we have discussed. The final iteration is that the we couldn't think of a non-magic declarative approach to nested Devices. If anyone has a good suggestion then we could revisit this ADR, otherwise I propose we merge this and stick with procedural Devices.