Initial commit
This commit is contained in:
Zhongwei Li
@@ -0,0 +1,210 @@
|
||||
<!-- SCOPE: Functional Requirements & Architecture Decisions -->
|
||||
<!-- INCLUDES: FRs (what we build), ADRs (why we decided), Success criteria -->
|
||||
<!-- EXCLUDES: Non-Functional Requirements (forbidden), Business context → Overview, System structure → Architecture, API contracts → Technical Spec, Implementation steps → Guides -->
|
||||
|
||||
<h2>Requirements</h2>
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- PLACEHOLDER: {{FUNCTIONAL_REQUIREMENTS}} -->
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE START: Remove this block after replacing placeholder -->
|
||||
<section class="functional-requirements">
|
||||
<h3>Functional Requirements</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<table>
|
||||
<thead>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<th>ID</th>
|
||||
<th>Priority</th>
|
||||
<th>Requirement</th>
|
||||
<th>Acceptance Criteria</th>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
</thead>
|
||||
<tbody>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td>FR-AUTH-001</td>
|
||||
<td><span class="priority-must">MUST</span></td>
|
||||
<td><strong>User Registration and Login</strong><br>
|
||||
Users must be able to register with email/password and login to access personalized features</td>
|
||||
<td>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Email validation (RFC 5322 compliant)</li>
|
||||
<li>Password strength requirements (min 8 chars, uppercase, lowercase, number)</li>
|
||||
<li>JWT token-based authentication</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
</td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td>FR-CATALOG-001</td>
|
||||
<td><span class="priority-must">MUST</span></td>
|
||||
<td><strong>Product Catalog Display</strong><br>
|
||||
System must display product catalog with search, filters, and pagination</td>
|
||||
<td>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Full-text search across product names and descriptions</li>
|
||||
<li>Filter by category, price range, availability</li>
|
||||
<li>Paginate results (20 items per page)</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
</td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td>FR-CART-001</td>
|
||||
<td><span class="priority-must">MUST</span></td>
|
||||
<td><strong>Shopping Cart Management</strong><br>
|
||||
Users must be able to add/remove products to/from cart</td>
|
||||
<td>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Add product with quantity selection</li>
|
||||
<li>Update quantities in cart</li>
|
||||
<li>Remove items from cart</li>
|
||||
<li>Cart persists across sessions (logged-in users)</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
</td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
</tbody>
|
||||
</table>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE END -->
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- PLACEHOLDER: {{ADR_STRATEGIC}} -->
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE START: Remove this block after replacing placeholder -->
|
||||
<section class="adr-section">
|
||||
<h3>📋 Architecture Decision Records</h3>
|
||||
|
||||
<div class="adr-group">
|
||||
<h4>🎯 Strategic Decisions</h4>
|
||||
|
||||
<details class="adr-item">
|
||||
<summary>ADR-001: Microservices vs Monolith Architecture</summary>
|
||||
<p><strong>Date:</strong> 2025-09-15 | <strong>Status:</strong> Accepted | <strong>Category:</strong> Strategic</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Context</h4>
|
||||
<p>Need to choose architecture pattern for e-commerce platform considering team size, scaling requirements, and deployment complexity.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Decision</h4>
|
||||
<p>Use <strong>modular monolith</strong> architecture with clear domain boundaries.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Rationale</h4>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Small team (5 developers) - microservices overhead too high</li>
|
||||
<li>Faster time to market with simplified deployment</li>
|
||||
<li>Clear module boundaries allow future microservices extraction</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Alternatives Considered</h4>
|
||||
<table>
|
||||
<thead>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<th>Alternative</th>
|
||||
<th>Pros</th>
|
||||
<th>Cons</th>
|
||||
<th>Rejection Reason</th>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
</thead>
|
||||
<tbody>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td>Microservices</td>
|
||||
<td>Independent scaling, technology diversity</td>
|
||||
<td>Operational complexity, team overhead</td>
|
||||
<td>Team too small, premature optimization</td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td>Traditional monolith</td>
|
||||
<td>Simplest to build</td>
|
||||
<td>Difficult to scale, tight coupling</td>
|
||||
<td>No clear boundaries for future evolution</td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
</tbody>
|
||||
</table>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Consequences</h4>
|
||||
<p><strong>Positive:</strong></p>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Faster development and deployment</li>
|
||||
<li>Easier testing and debugging</li>
|
||||
<li>Lower infrastructure costs</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
<p><strong>Negative:</strong></p>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Cannot scale individual modules independently</li>
|
||||
<li>Requires discipline to maintain module boundaries</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE END -->
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- PLACEHOLDER: {{ADR_TECHNICAL}} -->
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE START: Remove this block after replacing placeholder -->
|
||||
<div class="adr-group">
|
||||
<h4>🔧 Technical Decisions</h4>
|
||||
|
||||
<details class="adr-item">
|
||||
<summary>ADR-002: Database Choice - PostgreSQL vs MongoDB</summary>
|
||||
<p><strong>Date:</strong> 2025-09-18 | <strong>Status:</strong> Accepted | <strong>Category:</strong> Technical</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Context</h4>
|
||||
<p>Need to select database for e-commerce transactional data considering ACID requirements, scalability, and query complexity.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Decision</h4>
|
||||
<p>Use <strong>PostgreSQL 15.x</strong> as primary database.</p>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Rationale</h4>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Strong ACID guarantees for transactions (orders, payments)</li>
|
||||
<li>JSON support for flexible product attributes</li>
|
||||
<li>Excellent performance for complex queries</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Alternatives Considered</h4>
|
||||
<table>
|
||||
<thead>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<th>Alternative</th>
|
||||
<th>Pros</th>
|
||||
<th>Cons</th>
|
||||
<th>Rejection Reason</th>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
</thead>
|
||||
<tbody>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td>MongoDB</td>
|
||||
<td>Schema flexibility, horizontal scaling</td>
|
||||
<td>Weak transaction support, complex queries difficult</td>
|
||||
<td>E-commerce requires strong ACID for financial data</td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
<tr>
|
||||
<td>MySQL</td>
|
||||
<td>Widely adopted, good performance</td>
|
||||
<td>Limited JSON support, fewer features</td>
|
||||
<td>PostgreSQL offers better feature set</td>
|
||||
</tr>
|
||||
</tbody>
|
||||
</table>
|
||||
|
||||
<h4>Consequences</h4>
|
||||
<p><strong>Positive:</strong></p>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Data integrity guaranteed for financial transactions</li>
|
||||
<li>Rich ecosystem and tooling</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
<p><strong>Negative:</strong></p>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>Vertical scaling limitations (mitigated by read replicas)</li>
|
||||
<li>Schema migrations require careful planning</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
</details>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE END -->
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- PLACEHOLDER: {{SUCCESS_CRITERIA}} -->
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE START: Remove this block after replacing placeholder -->
|
||||
<section class="success-criteria">
|
||||
<h3>Success Criteria</h3>
|
||||
<ul>
|
||||
<li>✅ MVP handles 1,000+ daily active users</li>
|
||||
<li>✅ 99.5% uptime in first 3 months</li>
|
||||
<li>✅ Average checkout time < 3 minutes</li>
|
||||
<li>✅ 85%+ test coverage (E2E + Integration + Unit)</li>
|
||||
<li>✅ Zero critical security vulnerabilities</li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<!-- EXAMPLE END -->
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user