From 155cca5eeb3a66f71ee1f58a793a0d4fece4994f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: deeaitch Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 17:39:54 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] General adr description --- adr/readme.md | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 83 insertions(+) create mode 100644 adr/readme.md diff --git a/adr/readme.md b/adr/readme.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..709ea83 --- /dev/null +++ b/adr/readme.md @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +# Architecture Decision Records + +This directory contains Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) used throughout the OTA Reference Design. + +Unlike ADRs maintained within a single commercial project, these documents are **not** a historical record of decisions made for one specific product. + +Instead, they serve as **reference architectural decisions** illustrating how an experienced engineer might reason about common OTA design problems under different technical constraints. + +## Purpose + +Each ADR documents: + +- the engineering context; +- the decision being considered; +- the factors driving that decision; +- the expected consequences; +- the situations where the decision is appropriate; +- the situations where another approach may be preferable. + +The goal is not to declare one solution universally correct. + +The goal is to explain **why** a particular decision would be reasonable for a particular class of systems. + +## Relationship to the Documentation + +The repository intentionally separates three different types of documents. + +### Concept Articles (`docs/`) + +Concept articles explain the design space. + +They answer questions such as: + +- What approaches exist? +- How do they work? +- What problems do they solve? +- What trade-offs do they introduce? + +Their purpose is education. + +### Architecture Decision Records (`adr/`) + +ADRs answer a different question: + +> Given a particular set of engineering constraints, what decision would be made, and why? + +They intentionally focus on architectural reasoning rather than implementation details. + +### Decision Matrix + +After the individual ADRs, the series concludes with a decision matrix that compares the approaches and helps relate system constraints to architectural choices. + +The matrix is not intended to automatically select a solution. Instead, it provides a structured way to evaluate trade-offs. + +## Educational Nature + +These ADRs are examples. + +A real product may reach different conclusions depending on its: + +- reliability requirements; +- hardware architecture; +- network constraints; +- operational model; +- regulatory requirements; +- maintenance strategy; +- business priorities. + +For that reason, every ADR should be read as: + +> "Given these assumptions, this is the architectural decision we would make." + +rather than: + +> "This is the only correct solution." + +## Design Philosophy + +Throughout this repository, architectural decisions follow the same principle: + +> **Architecture should be driven by system constraints, not by technology preferences.** + +The objective is to teach the engineering process behind OTA design rather than promote a specific framework, product, or update mechanism.