integrate sections from SouvWP ADR template (#4)

adr-template.md

@@ -2,13 +2,26 @@
 # {short title of solved problem and solution}
 
 ---
-<!-- These are optional elements. Feel free to remove any of them. -->
 
-- status: {proposed | rejected | accepted | deprecated | … | supersedes: [ADR-0004](0004-example.md) | superseded by [ADR-0005](0005-example.md)}
+- status: {draft | submitted to TDA | accepted | rejected}
+- supersedes: { - | [ADR-0004](0004-example.md)}
+- superseded by: { - | [ADR-0005](0005-example.md)}
 - date: {YYYY-MM-DD when the decision was last updated}
-- deciders: {list everyone involved in the decision}
-- consulted: {list everyone whose opinions are sought (typically subject-matter experts); and with whom there is a two-way communication}
-- informed: {list everyone who is kept up-to-date on progress; and with whom there is a one-way communication}
+- author: {contact or informed captain for this ADR}
+- approval level: {low | medium | high} <!-- (see explanation below) -->
+- coordinated with: {list everyone involved in the decision and whose opinions were sought (e.g. subject-matter experts)}
+- source: {(link to) ticket / epic / issue that lead to the creation of this ADR}
+- scope: { - | ADR is only valid {until date | until event | as a workaround until better solution … exists}
+             | in project … | in product … (defaults to the directory this ADR is stored in)}
+- resubmission: { - | YYYY-MM-DD if the scope is time-limited}
+
+<!--
+Explanation "approval level"
+
+- low: Low impact on platform and business. Decisions at this level can be made within the TDA with the involved team(s). Other stakeholders are then informed.
+- medium: Decisions of medium scope, i.e. minor adjustments to the platform or strategic decisions regarding specifications. The approval of the product owner is requested and the decision is made jointly.
+- high: Decisions with a high impact on the business and IT. Changes that have a high-cost implication or strategic impact, among other things. These types of decisions require the decision to be made together with the leadership board.
+-->
 
 ---
 
@@ -21,6 +34,11 @@
 
 <!-- This is an optional element. Feel free to remove. -->
 
+<!-- Include qualities and architectural principles that influence the decision,
+     e.g. simplicity, standardization, modularity, security, robustness, scalability, …
+     See also https://git.knut.univention.de/groups/univention/dev-issues/-/wikis/home
+-->
+
 - {decision driver 1, e.g., a force, facing concern, …}
 - {decision driver 2, e.g., a force, facing concern, …}
 - … <!-- numbers of drivers can vary -->
@@ -32,24 +50,6 @@
 - {title of option 3}
 - … <!-- numbers of options can vary -->
 
-## Decision Outcome
-
-Chosen option: "{title of option 1}", because
-{justification. e.g., only option, which meets k.o. criterion decision driver | which resolves force {force} | … | comes out best (see below)}.
-
-### Consequences
-
-<!-- This is an optional element. Feel free to remove. -->
-
-- Good, because {positive consequence, e.g., improvement of one or more desired qualities, …}
-- Bad, because {negative consequence, e.g., compromising one or more desired qualities, …}
-- … <!-- numbers of consequences can vary -->
-
-### Confirmation
-
-{Describe how the implementation of/compliance with the ADR is confirmed. E.g., by a review or an ArchUnit test.
- Although we classify this element as optional, it is included in most ADRs.}
-
 ## Pros and Cons of the Options
 
 <!-- This is an optional element. Feel free to remove. -->
@@ -76,12 +76,37 @@ Chosen option: "{title of option 1}", because
 - Bad, because {argument d}
 - …
 
+## Decision Outcome
+
+Chosen option: "{title of option 1}", because
+{justification. e.g., only option, which meets k.o. criterion decision driver | which resolves force {force} | … | comes out best (see below)}.
+
+### Consequences
+
+<!-- This is an optional element. Feel free to remove. -->
+
+- Good, because {positive consequence, e.g., improvement of one or more desired qualities, …}
+- Bad, because {negative consequence, e.g., compromising one or more desired qualities, …}
+- … <!-- numbers of consequences can vary -->
+
+### Risks
+
+<!-- It's OK to repeat points from the above "Cons of the Options". -->
+<!-- Maybe use "Risk storming" to identify risks. -->
+
+- When implementing the decision, a {small, medium, high} risk exists, that {…}.
+- …
+
+### Confirmation
+
+{Describe how the implementation of/compliance with the ADR is confirmed. E.g., by a review or an ArchUnit test.
+ Although we classify this element as optional, it is included in most ADRs.}
+
 ## More Information
 
 <!-- This is an optional element. Feel free to remove. -->
 
 {You might want to provide additional evidence/confidence for the decision outcome here and/or
- document the team agreement on the decision and/or
- define when this decision when and how the decision should be realized and if/when it should be re-visited and/or
- how the decision is validated.
+ document the team agreement on the decision and/or define when this decision and how the decision
+ should be realized and if/when it should be re-visited and/or how the decision is validated.
  Links to other decisions and resources might appear here as well.}