[173] Adds Architecture Decision Record for app containerization discussion. #181
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for bringing a structured process to the analysis. I added some comments (to one, but could be applied to all) to explicitly call out some assumptions and get additional details. Perhaps the answer to all of those are 'NA', but it's good to acknowledge that as part of the decision.
| ## Considered Options Utility Scripts | ||
| * Run RAG generation script manually & locally | ||
| * Run RAG generation script in GH actions on change | ||
| * Deploy RAG generation script as Cloud Function |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing Pros & Cons for Utility Scripts
| * Good, because likely the cheapest solution | ||
| * Bad, because more GCP infrastructure to track |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm assuming it is minimal, but might be worth noting relative performance metrics. It would be good to know if the payload (can the size be estimated/quantified? or just define a reasonable upper-bound?) for static content meaningfully slows down the initial page loading. Would this make any difference to mobile?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this affect developer experience at all? Testing? Browser compatibility (e.g. Safari)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this affect site security (i.e. smaller/larger/different attack surface?) or maintenance (i.e. audit/update JS dependencies, additional secrets management)?
What type of PR is this? (check all applicable)
Description
Attempts documenting potential decision for containerization of the application
Related Tickets & Documents
QA Instructions, Screenshots, Recordings
Attempt to read the docs, if they are not readable then fail QA
Added/updated tests?
[optional] Are there any post deployment tasks we need to perform?
None