"Markdown Architectural Decision Records" (MADR)
[ˈmæɾɚ]– architectural decisions that matter
- 2018-04-13: Mentioned in @vanto's presentation about ADRs: https://speakerdeck.com/vanto/a-brief-introduction-to-architectural-decision-records.
- 2018-04-03: Scientific publication: Markdown Architectural Decision Records: Format and Tool Support.
It should be as easy as possible to a) write down the decisions and b) to version the decisions.
This repository offers a solution to record architectural decisions. It provides files to document Architectural Decisions using Markdown and Architectural Decision Records.
The decisions are placed in the folder
- Enable GitHub pages to render it using the web. See https://help.github.com/articles/configuring-a-publishing-source-for-github-pages/ for more information.
- Separate the architectural decisions from other documentation.
The filenames are following the pattern
NNNN-title-with-dashes.md (ADR-0005), where
NNNNis a consecutive number and we assume that there won't be more than 9,999 ADRs in one repository.
- the title is stored using dashes and lowercase, because adr-tools also does that.
- the suffix is
.md, because it is a Markdown file.
Table of Contents
The template reads as follows:
# [short title of solved problem and solution] * Status: [proposed | rejected | accepted | deprecated | … | superseded by [ADR-0005](0005-example.md)] <!-- optional --> * Deciders: [list everyone involved in the decision] <!-- optional --> * Date: [YYYY-MM-DD when the decision was last updated] <!-- optional --> Technical Story: [description | ticket/issue URL] <!-- optional --> ## Context and Problem Statement [Describe the context and problem statement, e.g., in free form using two to three sentences. You may want to articulate the problem in form of a question.] ## Decision Drivers <!-- optional --> * [driver 1, e.g., a force, facing concern, …] * [driver 2, e.g., a force, facing concern, …] * … <!-- numbers of drivers can vary --> ## Considered Options * [option 1] * [option 2] * [option 3] * … <!-- numbers of options can vary --> ## Decision Outcome Chosen option: "[option 1]", because [justification. e.g., only option, which meets k.o. criterion decision driver | which resolves force force | … | comes out best (see below)]. ### Positive Consequences <!-- optional --> * [e.g., improvement of quality attribute satisfaction, follow-up decisions required, …] * … ### Negative Consequences <!-- optional --> * [e.g., compromising quality attribute, follow-up decisions required, …] * … ## Pros and Cons of the Options <!-- optional --> ### [option 1] [example | description | pointer to more information | …] <!-- optional --> * Good, because [argument a] * Good, because [argument b] * Bad, because [argument c] * … <!-- numbers of pros and cons can vary --> ### [option 2] [example | description | pointer to more information | …] <!-- optional --> * Good, because [argument a] * Good, because [argument b] * Bad, because [argument c] * … <!-- numbers of pros and cons can vary --> ### [option 3] [example | description | pointer to more information | …] <!-- optional --> * Good, because [argument a] * Good, because [argument b] * Bad, because [argument c] * … <!-- numbers of pros and cons can vary --> ## Links <!-- optional --> * [Link type] [Link to ADR] <!-- example: Refined by [ADR-0005](0005-example.md) --> * … <!-- numbers of links can vary -->
The template is available at template/template.md.
# Use Markdown Architectural Decision Records ## Context and Problem Statement We want to record architectural decisions made in this project. Which format and structure should these records follow? ## Considered Options * [MADR](https://adr.github.io/madr/) 2.1.0 - The Markdown Architectural Decision Records * [Michael Nygard's template](http://thinkrelevance.com/blog/2011/11/15/documenting-architecture-decisions) - The first incarnation of the term "ADR" * [Sustainable Architectural Decisions](https://www.infoq.com/articles/sustainable-architectural-design-decisions) - The Y-Statements * Other templates listed at <https://github.com/joelparkerhenderson/architecture_decision_record> * Formless - No conventions for file format and structure ## Decision Outcome Chosen option: "MADR 2.1.0", because * Implicit assumptions should be made explicit. Design documentation is important to enable people understanding the decisions later on. See also [A rational design process: How and why to fake it](https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.1986.6312940). * The MADR format is lean and fits our development style. * The MADR structure is comprehensible and facilitates usage & maintenance. * The MADR project is vivid. * Version 2.1.0 is the latest one available when starting to document ADRs.
The example is rendered at template/0000-use-markdown-architectural-decision-records.md
For the MADR project itself, all ADRs exist at docs/adr/.
Apply it to your project
docs/adr in your project.
Copy all files in
template from the MADR project to the folder
docs/adr in your project.
For instance, using
npm, this can be done using the following command:
npm install madr && mkdir -p docs/adr && cp node_modules/madr/template/* docs/adr/
Create a new ADR
NNNNindicates the next number in sequence.
index.md, e.g., by executing
adr-log -d .You can get adr-log by executing
npm install -g adr-log.
Note you can also use other patterns for the directory format, but then the tools cannot be applied.
- MADR follows Semantic Versioning 2.0.0 and documents changes in a
CHANGELOG.mdfollowing keep a changelog 1.0.0.
- Issues can be reported at https://github.com/adr/madr/issues.
- Use the Markdown Style Guide space-sentence:1, wrap:sentence, header:atx, list-marker:asterisk, list-space:1, code:fenced
Releasing a new version:
README.mdwith the new template and the example.
- Adapt the version reference in
package.json, publish to npmjs, create GitHub release.
Use release-it (do not create a release on GitHub) and github-release-from-changelog.