docs: add the adr template based on BDK's
What the developer wrote
Authored by Nick Johnson
docs: add the adr template based on BDK's
Architecture Decision Records (ADR) are a template for capturing why
a large code change was made. BDK has been using this template and
finding it helpful.
What changed, and why it matters
This commit adds a blank template document for Architecture Decision Records (ADRs). It is purely documentation and contains no code changes, no configuration changes, and no security-relevant content.
No security action required. This is a documentation-only addition.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The commit creates docs/adr/template.md, a 56-line Markdown template for recording architecture decisions. The diff shows only placeholder text and section headings; no Rust source, build scripts, dependencies, or CI configuration were modified.
Changed components
docs/adr/template.mdInspect captured patch +56 / −0
diff --git a/docs/adr/template.md b/docs/adr/template.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e17f9794
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/adr/template.md
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+# [short title of solved problem and solution]
+
+* Status: [proposed | rejected | accepted | deprecated | … | superseded by ADR-1234]
+* Authors: [list everyone who authored the decision]
+* Date: [YYYY-MM-DD when the decision was last updated]
+* Targeted modules: [which crate or module does this change target]
+* Associated tickets/PRs: [PR/issue links]
+
+## 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 <!-- numbers of options can vary -->
+
+#### [Option 1]
+
+[example | description | pointer to more information | …]
+
+**Pros:**
+
+* Good, because [argument …]
+
+**Cons:**
+
+* Bad, because [argument …]
+
+#### [Option 2]
+...
+
+#### [Option 3]
+...
+
+## 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, …]
+* …
+
+## Links <!-- optional -->
+
+* [Link type] [Link to ADR] <!-- example: Refined by [ADR-0005](0005-example.md) -->
+* … <!-- numbers of links can vary -->
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.