ADR Dynamic DataSource Registration

[juzuluag]

Pull Request

Issue Number: (#289)

Summary

Add 0014 ADR for Dynamic Data Source Registration

Changes

• Document describing the proposal

Checklist

• Documentation Updates Made?

Are there API Changes?

N/A

Is this a breaking change?

N/A

This PR Closes #289, microsoft#228

[JenMadiedo]

I think this could be a good opportunity to also estimate what the implementation of this ADR could take. I.e., can you note estimated effort level for each of the pieces that would be required so they can be evaluated when turned into tickets? Especially since you have more context into the work since you wrote the ADR.

[juzuluag]

I think this could be a good opportunity to also estimate what the implementation of this ADR could take. I.e., can you note estimated effort level for each of the pieces that would be required so they can be evaluated when turned into tickets? Especially since you have more context into the work since you wrote the ADR.

Hey @JenMadiedo , I'll add what you suggested. Thanks for the feedback

[Kpopovs1]

Looks great, I love the addition of effort level 🚀 I added a few comments.

[juzuluag]

@vaughanknight, @gfmatthews this is ready for review

[Willmish]

Discussed in #323 , week to discuss and approve if no objections

[Willmish]

To discuss - implementation. Where should the .dll files be located (Currently proposed solution in base directory, DatasourcePlugins Plugins/DataSource Plugins? How do we load them (do we load all?) ? Add check if signed dll

[Willmish]

See ADR 6 as well, as it is relevant: https://github.com/Green-Software-Foundation/carbon-aware-sdk/blob/dev/docs/architecture/decisions/0006-data-source-registration.md

Maybe adding implementing adding external plugin (DataSources) first could be a good starting point, and move the builtin data sources as well? We would need to ensure however the startup for new users is still the same or easier - we don't want to make it harder, and express the changes in docs.

[bderusha]

First, let me say that I am all for the intent of this ADR. It feels like the right direction for the project and will make operating and extending it much easier. However, it covers a lot of ground which then leaves some unanswered questions for me.

• Should we publish the existing Data Sources as NuGet packages? I don't think this ADR is proposing it, but it would be good to be very clear about that.
• Will the existing data sources still live in this repo? My guess is yes, but also would be worth calling out.
• Do we have any guidance on how new external data sources can be discovered? Contribute back to main? Maintain a list in the docs?

As I mention in my inline comments, as written it's tricky to determine which pieces of this proposal are new and which are covered by ADR 0006. I think it will be easier to discuss if those pieces can be removed or at least referenced as a non-change.

[vaughanknight]

Still waiting on some updates to this PR prior to accepting the PR, primarily as the ADR is "accepted", so it can't be merged to be discussed. Other updates can come from the discussion once it's proposed formally.

[juzuluag]

Still waiting on some updates to this PR prior to accepting the PR, primarily as the ADR is "accepted", so it can't be merged to be discussed. Other updates can come from the discussion once it's proposed formally.

@vaughanknight , document updated. Thanks

[Willmish]

LGTM