From e8ac8ef4129c4a80c7da892734d30ada4c96d322 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ivo Gosemann <ivo.gosemann@sap.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 17:21:09 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] feat: init greenhouse release process adr

---
 .../014-greenhouse-release-process.md         | 96 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 96 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 architecture-decision-records/014-greenhouse-release-process.md

diff --git a/architecture-decision-records/014-greenhouse-release-process.md b/architecture-decision-records/014-greenhouse-release-process.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6ce5072
--- /dev/null
+++ b/architecture-decision-records/014-greenhouse-release-process.md
@@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
+# 006-greenhouse-release-process
+
+- Status: [draft | proposed | rejected | accepted | deprecated | … | superseded by [xxx](yyyymmdd-xxx.md)] <!-- optional -->
+- Deciders: [Ivo, Esther, Uwe, Arturo, Abhi, Wowa, Thomas] <!-- optional -->
+- Date: [YYYY-MM-DD when the decision was last updated] <!-- optional. To customize the ordering without relying on Git creation dates and filenames -->
+- Tags: [greenhouse / cloudoperators] <!-- optional -->
+- Technical Story: [description | ticket/issue URL] <!-- optional -->
+
+## Context and Problem Statement
+
+- Define Greenhouse core version and release mechanism; Plugins are a different topic
+- All together or different version allowed
+- Discuss improvements to our versioned release mechanism (currently very cumbersome for Greenhouse MFEs)
+- E2E/Smoke tests, automation to create and publish release (make, GH workflow) + documentation
+
+**Discussion:**
+
+- For GH deployment version bumping in various places required. Very cumbersome.
+- Workaround tagging on `latest` is being used.
+- Single source of truth for versions
+- One version for GH core with plugin versions compatbility matrix
+- Follow Kubernetes release principles. Version CRDs and treat as API contracts
+- Automate version upgrades (dependabot, renovate)
+- Consider draft releases
+
+## 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 | Evaluation of options <!-- optional -->
+
+### [option 1]
+
+[example | description | pointer to more information | …] <!-- optional -->
+
+| Decision Driver     | Rating | Reason                        |
+|---------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
+| [decision driver a] | +++    | Good, because [argument a]    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                | 
+| [decision driver b] | ---    | Good, because [argument b]    |
+| [decision driver c] | --     | Bad, because [argument c]     |
+| [decision driver d] | o      | Neutral, because [argument d] |
+
+### [option 2]
+
+[example | description | pointer to more information | …] <!-- optional -->
+
+| Decision Driver     | Rating | Reason                        |
+|---------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
+| [decision driver a] | +++    | Good, because [argument a]    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                | 
+| [decision driver b] | ---    | Good, because [argument b]    |
+| [decision driver c] | --     | Bad, because [argument c]     |
+| [decision driver d] | o      | Neutral, because [argument d] |
+
+### [option 3]
+
+[example | description | pointer to more information | …] <!-- optional -->
+
+| Decision Driver     | Rating | Reason                        |
+|---------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
+| [decision driver a] | +++    | Good, because [argument a]    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                | 
+| [decision driver b] | ---    | Good, because [argument b]    |
+| [decision driver c] | --     | Bad, because [argument c]     |
+| [decision driver d] | o      | Neutral, because [argument d] |
+
+## Related Decision Records <!-- optional -->
+
+[previous decision record, e.g., an ADR, which is solved by this one | next decision record, e.g., an ADR, which solves this one | … | pointer to more information]
+
+## Links <!-- optional -->
+
+- [Link type](link to adr) <!-- example: Refined by [xxx](yyyymmdd-xxx.md) -->
+- … <!-- numbers of links can vary -->