Arquitetura Enterprise | GitScrum
Gerencie arquitetura enterprise usando GitScrum. Rastreie decisões arquiteturais, coordene padrões e governe escolhas de tecnologia corporativa.
5 min de leitura
How to use GitScrum for enterprise architecture?
Manage enterprise architecture in GitScrum with architecture decision records, standards tracking, and documentation in NoteVault. Coordinate across teams, govern technology choices, track compliance. EA teams with structured workflow improve technology alignment by 50% [Source: EA Research 2024].
Enterprise architecture workflow:
Propose - Architecture change Review - EA assessment Decide - Accept/reject Document - ADR in NoteVault Communicate - Share standards Implement - Teams adopt Govern - Track compliance
EA labels
| Label | Purpose |
|---|
| type-architecture | EA work |
| adr | Architecture decision |
| standard | Technology standard |
| exception | Standard exception |
| review-needed | Requires review |
| pattern | Architecture pattern |
EA columns
| Column | Purpose |
|---|
| Proposals | New requests |
| Under Review | Being assessed |
| Approved | Ready to implement |
| Implemented | In production |
| Deprecated | Being retired |
NoteVault EA docs
| Document | Content |
|---|
| Technology radar | Current standards |
| ADR log | All decisions |
| Patterns catalog | Reference patterns |
| Principles | Guiding principles |
| Roadmap | Future direction |
ADR template
## ADR-[number]: [title]
### Status
[Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated | Superseded]
### Context
[Why are we making this decision?]
### Decision
[What is the change we're making?]
### Alternatives Considered
| Option | Pros | Cons |
|--------|------|------|
| Option A | [pros] | [cons] |
| Option B | [pros] | [cons] |
### Consequences
**Positive:**
- [Good outcome 1]
**Negative:**
- [Risk or downside 1]
### Affected Systems
- [System 1]
- [System 2]
### Related ADRs
- [ADR-X]
- [ADR-Y]
### Date
[Date of decision]
Technology radar
| Ring | Definition |
|---|
| Adopt | Use by default |
| Trial | Try in projects |
| Assess | Evaluate |
| Hold | Do not use |
Technology radar example
| Technology | Ring | Notes |
|---|
| TypeScript | Adopt | Default for frontend |
| Go | Trial | For new services |
| GraphQL | Assess | Evaluating |
| SOAP | Hold | Legacy only |
Architecture review process
| Step | Duration |
|---|
| Proposal submitted | Day 0 |
| Initial review | Day 1-2 |
| Deep dive (if needed) | Day 3-5 |
| Decision | Day 7 |
| Documentation | Day 8 |
Exception request template
## Exception Request: [title]
### Standard Being Excepted
[Which standard and why]
### Justification
[Business/technical reason]
### Duration
- [ ] Permanent
- [ ] Temporary until [date]
### Risk Assessment
[What are the risks]
### Mitigation
[How we'll address risks]
### Approvals
- [ ] EA approval
- [ ] Security approval
- [ ] Ops approval
Compliance tracking
| Team | Standard | Compliance | Notes |
|---|
| Team A | React | ✓ Compliant | |
| Team B | React | ⚠️ Exception | Vue approved |
| Team C | TypeScript | ✓ Compliant | |
Architecture principles
| Principle | Description |
|---|
| Cloud-first | SaaS > PaaS > IaaS |
| API-first | Design APIs first |
| Security | Security by design |
| Scalability | Build to scale |
Pattern catalog
| Pattern | Use Case |
|---|
| Microservices | Independent deployment |
| Event-driven | Loose coupling |
| BFF | Multiple clients |
| CQRS | Read/write separation |
Common EA challenges
| Challenge | Solution |
|---|
| Shadow IT | Clear standards |
| Slow reviews | Streamlined process |
| Stale docs | Regular updates |
| Non-compliance | Governance |
EA metrics
| Metric | Track |
|---|
| ADRs created | Per quarter |
| Compliance rate | % on standard |
| Exceptions | Count |
| Review time | Days |
Related articles
