View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Agile ROAM Board |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  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. | When work needs to move between different states or columns, it makes that movement and its handoffs legible. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a ROAM Board and an Owner List. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 20-40 min initial, dann laufend | 15-45 min | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 3-15 | 1-3 | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ROAM Board, Owner List | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | RiskAgileTrackingAlignment | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |