methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
A paper-based illustration representing arc42 with its core stages and visible working result.
Architecture
arc42
Purposedifferent
An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale.LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional15-45 min1-2 Tage
Participantsdifferent
3-20 Reviewer1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people1-31-4
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsLean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checksADR File, Decision Log, RationaleArchitecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View
Tags1 shared
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication
Add more methods