Document "Production ready by default" design principle

[andreasohlund]

This will be announced once merged as a reminder to downstream component maintainers

[andreasohlund]

@yvesgoeleven proposed that we should RFC this since downstream should buy into this idea as well

[timbussmann]

@yvesgoeleven proposed that we should RFC this since downstream should buy into this idea as well

I think we discussed this on the call and decided to not do an RFC for it?

• this principle was already stated in the visions repo and therefore, that guidance already existed and therefore already includes downstreams as well?
• it seems to be a quite obvious choice and I wonder whether this is a controversial topic which requires an RFC?

@yvesgoeleven do you have any concerns regarding that guideline or something which you feel should be discussed?

[andreasohlund]

To be fair the issue in the Vision repo was never properly announced so perhaps we can just announce this once the PR is merged?

[yvesgoeleven]

@timbussmann no concern, I just want it to be properly communicated to transport & persistence implementers that they should no longer optimize for the F5 experience, but be production ready instead (today this is not the case)

[andreasohlund]

@Particular/nservicebus-maintainers do we want to include some examples as well or is this enough?

[timbussmann]

@yvesgoeleven I didn't think about this as a tradeoff between F5 experience and production readiness tbh, is this something we need to be more clear about?

• if the endpoint uses default values, those should be valid choices for production
• if that's not possible (e.g. heavily impacts F5 experience), we can't make it a default value and configuration is mandatory (e.g. msmq error queue).

[yvesgoeleven]

@timbussmann in many cases it is a difficult choice what to use as a default for configuration values, it's not just a choice between F5 & safety, but also performance, security and other things to be considered. A clear guidance in what to prefer is very usefull, can't have it all ootb.

[timbussmann]

@yvesgoeleven would it be fair to say, that in those cases we should let the user decide? But also, if you go with a safer but less performing option by default, that doesn't seem to violate this rule as this still is a sensible default value.

[yvesgoeleven]

@timbussmann yeah sure fair to say, it just needs to be said explicitly. It needs to be properly communicated what the guidance and priorities are when selecting default values.

[andreasohlund]

@Particular/nservicebus-maintainers please review, will announce this once merged

[adamralph]

Late to the party, but this LGTM.