| description |
|---|
This is the suggested template to be used for ADRs on the cheqd-node project. |
| Category | Status |
|---|---|
| Authors | {Author or list of authors} |
| ADR Stage | {DRAFT | PROPOSED | ACCEPTED | REJECTED | SUPERSEDED by ADR-xxx | ABANDONED} |
| Implementation Status | {Implemented | In Progress | Not Implemented} |
| Start Date | {yyyy-mm-dd} |
| Last Updated | {yyyy-mm-dd} |
What is the status, such as proposed, accepted, rejected, deprecated, superseded, etc.?
A short (~100 word) description of the issue being addressed. "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Provide a simplified and layman-accessible explanation of the ADR.
This section describes the forces at play, such as business, technological, social, and project local. These forces are probably in tension, and should be called out as such. The language in this section is value-neutral. It is simply describing facts. It should clearly explain the problem and motivation that the proposal aims to resolve.
This section describes the implementation and/or architecture approach for the proposed changes in detail.
This section describes the resulting context, after applying the decision. All consequences should be listed here, not just the "positive" ones. A particular decision may have positive, negative, and neutral consequences, but all of them affect the team and project in the future.
All ADRs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The ADR must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. ADR submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright.
{positive consequences}
{negative consequences}
{neutral consequences}
- {reference link}
{list of questions or action items}