* They are not synced with the code to reflect the eventual solution that is committed
* Google Docs is not a "code-oriented" tool, like Markdown can be
* Review in Google Docs is not as simple as a PR code review in GitHub

## Decision

The *Build Tool Team* has decided to use Architectural Decision Records (aka ADR) to track decisions we want to follow.

The main logic with ADRs is to describe (architectural) decisions made:

     * archived URLs.
     *
     * Please note that the value of this tag is considered a hint and not a
     * command. Even though search engine crawlers may consider this information
     * when making decisions, they may crawl pages marked "hourly" less
     * frequently than that, and they may crawl pages marked "yearly" more
     * frequently than that. Crawlers may periodically crawl pages marked

*.md                                    @gradle/bt-product-operations @gradle/bt-docs-reviewers
contributing/                           @gradle/bt-product-operations @gradle/bt-docs-reviewers

# Cross-cutting architecture checks and decisions
.github/CODEOWNERS                          @gradle/bt-architecture-council
architecture/                               @gradle/bt-architecture-council
testing/architecture-test                   @gradle/bt-architecture-council

///

### Editor support { #editor-support }

All the framework was designed to be easy and intuitive to use, all the decisions were tested on multiple editors even before starting development, to ensure the best development experience.

///

### Support d'éditeurs

Tout le framework a été conçu pour être facile et intuitif d'utilisation, toutes les décisions de design ont été testées sur de nombreux éditeurs avant même de commencer le développement final afin d'assurer la meilleure expérience de développement possible.

 *   <li><strong>Cross-Module Inference</strong>: Uses knowledge of all project artifacts for intelligent inference decisions</li>
 *   <li><strong>RelativePath Resolution</strong>: Resolves parent POMs via relativePath for artifactId inference</li>
 * </ul>
 *
 * <h3>Format Preservation</h3>
 * <ul>

		}
	}
	return b.String()
}

// ResyncDecision is a struct representing a map with target's individual resync decisions
type ResyncDecision struct {
	targets map[string]ResyncTargetDecision
}

// Empty returns true if no targets with resync decision present
func (r ResyncDecision) Empty() bool {
	return r.targets == nil
}

func (r ResyncDecision) mustResync() bool {

   *  * For server failures (503: Service Unavailable.)
   *
   * Response header values like `Location` and `Retry-After` are also considered.
   *
   * Client configuration may be used to make follow-up decisions, such as:
   *
   *  * [OkHttpClient.followRedirects] must be true to follow redirects.
   *  * [OkHttpClient.followSslRedirects] must be true to follow redirects that add or remove HTTPS.

* Restarts
* Replication (the number of processes running)
* Memory
* Previous steps before starting

Understanding these ideas and how to apply them should give you the intuition necessary to take any decisions when configuring and tweaking your deployments. 🤓

But as TypeScript data is not preserved after compilation to JavaScript, it cannot rely on the types to define validation, serialization and documentation at the same time. Due to this and some design decisions, to get validation, serialization and automatic schema generation, it's needed to add decorators in many places. So, it becomes quite verbose.