-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ADR: use separate repo #43
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As this is the project's -- and my! -- first ADR, I've left several comments. I'd be happy to talk more about them; rework the PR; do something else 🙂
* The Dockerfile used to generate the dev containers Docker image | ||
* The tooling and GitHub actions to build the Docker image and to run the tests | ||
* Some of the supporting files for the research-template (e.g documentation and ADRs). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But why? For example:
We will store the Dockerfile in research-template-docker because we do not want researchers to modify it and because we want to version it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've tried to address that in the consequences section, which I've reworded in my most recent commit. I've tried to keep the decision section short and to just state the decision without the reasoning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nygard doesn't mention that the decision section should describe (what) but not explain (why). If this is a principle that we're going to adopt (and I'm ambivalent 🙂), then we should add a note to docs/adr/0000-record-architecture-decisions.md
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for responding to my comments, @lucyb. You'll notice that I've made some more comments, but none are critical.
I think that a major limitation of not recording architectural decisions when those architectural decisions are made is that the context and consequences are hard to establish: we have to reconstruct the context from memory and the consequences are clearer, as we've lived with them.
I think that there's more to say about ADRs in general, but this isn't the place. Having a record is better than not; and having a record that emphasises the advantages and disadvantages of an architectural decision is better than having a record that emphasises only the advantages.
This documents our use of a separate repo for the Dockerfile and other supporting files needed for the research-template dev container configuration. Fixes #63
Thanks again for the feedback Iain, I think the ADR is looking much better as a result. I also agree about writing up the ADRs closer to the point the decision is made in future! |
This documents our use of a separate repo for the Dockerfile and other supporting files needed for the research-template dev container configuration.
Closes opensafely-core/codespaces-initiative#63