Architecture Decision Records

Public Summary

This page tracks major architectural decisions and the reasons behind them.

Internal Details

ADR-001: Layered Express Architecture

• Status: Accepted
• Context: Feature growth required clear responsibility boundaries.
• Decision: Use controller -> service -> repository -> model layering.
• Consequences: Better testability and readability, with moderate boilerplate cost.

ADR-002: Feature-Based Frontend Structure

• Status: Accepted
• Context: Dashboard and map functionality expanded into many domains.
• Decision: Organize frontend by feature folders with per-feature hooks and pages.
• Consequences: Better ownership and modular navigation, with risk of duplicated helper logic.

ADR-003: Self-Hosted OSRM Routing

• Status: Accepted
• Context: Need for route operations without per-request third-party map cost.
• Decision: Run OSRM as a dedicated service with preprocessed map data.
• Consequences: Better control and cost profile, increased infrastructure/data maintenance.

ADR-004: Docker Compose For Dev And Prod

• Status: Accepted
• Context: Need reproducible environments across onboarding and deployment.
• Decision: Maintain compose definitions for development and production.
• Consequences: High reproducibility, but production orchestration remains single-host.

ADR-005: Feature Flags For Search Features

• Status: Accepted
• Context: AI/embedding features carry cost and operational variability.
• Decision: Gate behavior through feature flags in backend and frontend.
• Consequences: Safer rollout, requires discipline to remove stale flags.