How to Set Up an Async Decision-Making Framework for Remote Teams

Title: [One-line summary]

What decision needs to be made:
[Specific decision, not vague discussion]

Why it matters (context):
[Business impact, timeline, dependencies]

By when does this need to be decided:
[Hard deadline or soft deadline?]

Who decides:
[Decision maker. If consensus needed, list who has veto power]

Who should weigh in:
[People whose input improves decision, not everyone]

Title: Migrate frontend from Vue 2 to Vue 3

What decision needs to be made:
Should we upgrade from Vue 2 to Vue 3 by Q2 2026?

Why it matters (context):
Vue 2 reaches end-of-life Oct 2026. Upgrading now ensures
support through 2030. Upgrading requires ~120 hours across
5 engineers (2 sprints of work).

By when does this need to be decided:
Hard deadline: March 31 (need April + May sprints to execute)

Who decides:
Tech Lead (Jen), Engineering Manager (Marcus)

Who should weigh in:
- Frontend engineers (impact on daily work)
- DevOps (deployment/testing changes)
- Product (timeline impact on features)
- Not: Sales, Marketing, Finance (no impact)

# Decision Doc: [Title]

## 1. Context & Problem Statement
[Why this decision exists now]

## 2. Options Being Considered
- Option A: [Description, pros, cons, timeline, cost]
- Option B: [Description, pros, cons, timeline, cost]
- Option C: [Description, pros, cons, timeline, cost]

## 3. Key Tradeoffs
| Factor | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|--------|----------|----------|----------|
| Development Time | 2 weeks | 6 weeks | 1 week |
| Maintenance Cost | $5k/year | $2k/year | $8k/year |
| Scalability | Medium | High | Low |
| Team Familiarity | High | Low | Medium |

## 4. Implementation Path
[How would we execute on each option]

## 5. Reversibility
[Can we change our mind later? At what cost?]

## 6. Questions from Stakeholders
[Q: Why not use X? A: ...]
[Q: What about budget? A: ...]

## 7. Recommendation
[If decision maker has a recommendation, state clearly with rationale]

## 8. Input from Stakeholders
[Contributions from frontend team, DevOps, Product, etc.]

# Decision Doc: Vue 2 to Vue 3 Migration

## 1. Context
Vue 2 reaches EOL October 2026. Security updates will stop.
We have 500+ Vue components to migrate.

## 2. Options Being Considered
- Option A: Migrate Q2 2026 (April-May, 2 sprints)
- Option B: Migrate Q3 2026 (July-Aug, 2 sprints)
- Option C: Migrate Q4 2026 (Oct-Nov, just before EOL)

## 3. Key Tradeoffs
| Factor | Option A (Q2) | Option B (Q3) | Option C (Q4) |
|--------|--------------|--------------|----------------|
| Team Velocity Impact | 2 sprints lost | 2 sprints lost | 2 sprints lost |
| Risk of Security Issues | None | Low | High |
| Feature Velocity Impact | -40% for 4 weeks | -40% for 4 weeks | -40% for 4 weeks |
| Dependencies | None | None | Compressed timeline |
| Planned Refactors | Can coordinate | Might conflict | Rushed |

## 4. Implementation Path
Option A:
1. Audit dependency compatibility (1 week async)
2. Upgrade core dependencies in parallel (1 week)
3. Batch component migration (3 weeks, all engineers)
4. QA and deployment (1 week)

## 5. Reversibility
Reversible at any point, but each week of delay increases risk.
If we hit critical issue mid-migration, we can roll back to Vue 2
with 1-2 days of work.

## 6. Questions from Stakeholders
Q: Could we do incremental migration? 
A: Vue 2 + Vue 3 can coexist, but requires webpack config changes
and shared state management. Estimated +2 weeks. Not recommended.

Q: What if features are delayed?
A: This is 2 full sprint impact. Product should plan accordingly.

Q: Budget impact?
A: Zero direct cost. Development cost is time (120 hours).
Framework cost: Vue stays free.

## 7. Recommendation from Tech Lead
"Recommend Option A (Q2). Every month of delay increases technical
debt and risk. Our latest features already use Vue 3 patterns."

## 8. Input from Stakeholders

Frontend Team (3 engineers):
"We've used Vue 3 in new projects. The upgrade is straightforward.
One concern: our state management (Vuex) needs to be updated to Pinia."

DevOps:
"CI/CD supports Vue 3. No infrastructure changes needed."

Product Manager:
"Q2 is tight but acceptable. We're planning feature X for Q3,
so timing works. Just need to defer smaller items Q2."

Input Period: March 15 - March 17 (3 days)

How to contribute:
1. Read full document first
2. Add comments to relevant sections
3. Post questions in "Questions" section
4. Do NOT edit the core content

Comment format:
- Start with [YOUR_NAME]:
- Ask questions, don't make statements
- Link to external research if relevant
- Example:
  "[Sarah]: I'm seeing Vite builds 2x faster than Vue 3
   official docs claim. Should we test locally? 
   See: https://example.com/vite-benchmark"

DO NOT:
- Change other people's sections without permission
- Make strong statements ("This is wrong")
- Defer to synchronous discussion
- Use this as a debate platform

# Input from Frontend Engineer (Arun):

[Arun]: I checked our Vuex usage. We have:
- 12 store modules
- 45 actions
- 150 computed properties

Migrating to Pinia will take ~4 days. Should we do this
in parallel or sequential with Vue 3 upgrade?

# Input from DevOps (Maria):

[Maria]: I'll set up Vue 3 in dev/staging this week.
Estimated deployment time: 1 hour (blue-green).
No rollback complications.

# Input from Product (Kim):

[Kim]: This timing works if we compress sprint 2 by deferring:
- Accessibility improvements (Q3)
- Mobile polish (Q3)
- Analytics dashboard (Q4)

That gives 1 full sprint for Vue 3 work, acceptable.

# DECISION: [Title]

Decision: [Clear yes/no/modified choice]

Decided By: [Name]
Date: [Date]

Key Reasoning:
1. [First reason]
2. [Second reason]
3. [Third reason]

Concerns Addressed:
- [Concern from input 1]: [How decision addresses it]
- [Concern from input 2]: [How decision addresses it]

What Happens Next:
- [Owner]: Action 1 by [date]
- [Owner]: Action 2 by [date]
- [Owner]: Action 3 by [date]

When Will We Revisit:
[Date or condition to re-examine decision]

Reversibility:
[Can this be changed? Under what conditions?]

# DECISION: Vue 2 to Vue 3 Migration

Decision: Proceed with Option A (Q2 2026 migration)

Decided By: Jen (Tech Lead)
Date: March 18, 2026

Key Reasoning:
1. Every month of delay increases risk of security issues
2. Our team has Vue 3 experience from recent projects
3. Product team's Q3 blocking items can be deferred
4. Technical debt from Vue 2 is accumulating (new features
   already written in Vue 3 patterns)

Concerns Addressed:
- "Will this delay features?" 
  Yes, 2 weeks of feature delay expected. Product has deferred
  lower-priority items to accommodate.
  
- "Is Pinia migration risky?"
  Pinia is official replacement for Vuex. Migration path is
  well-documented. 4 days estimated buffer included.

- "What if we hit blockers?"
  We can roll back to Vue 2 if critical issue found (1-2 days).
  Recommend testing in staging for 1 week before production.

What Happens Next:
- Arun (Frontend): Audit Vue 3 + Pinia compatibility (Mar 21-22)
- Maria (DevOps): Set up CI/CD for Vue 3 (Mar 21-24)
- Team: Begin component migration (Apr 1)
- Arun: State management migration (Apr 1-5)
- All: Testing + deployment (Apr 15-30)

When Will We Revisit:
- Weekly check-ins during migration (Apr 1-30)
- Post-migration retrospective (May 2)
- If blockers encountered, discuss synchronously

Reversibility:
Yes. If we encounter critical issue, we can rollback within
24 hours. After production deployment, rollback becomes harder
(depends on what's deployed to production in Vue 3).

# Implementation Tracker: [Decision]

## Planned Actions
- [ ] Action 1 (Owner, Due: Date)
- [ ] Action 2 (Owner, Due: Date)
- [ ] Action 3 (Owner, Due: Date)

## Progress (Updated weekly)
Week 1: [Summary of progress]
Week 2: [Summary of progress]

## Blockers + Changes
If the decision is being changed or blocked, note here.

## Post-Decision Learning
After 4 weeks:
- Did we meet timeline targets?
- What went faster/slower than expected?
- Would we make same decision again?
- What would we change next time?

- Create shared folder: "Decisions 2026"
- Template doc with decision structure
- Add folder to team wiki sidebar
- Set comment permissions (suggest, not edit)

Title: Cloud Provider Migration: AWS to GCP

What decision needs to be made:
Should we migrate from AWS to GCP by Q3 2026?

Why it matters:
- GCP has better pricing for our ML workloads (30% savings estimated)
- AWS RDS costs rising due to increased data volume
- Team has GCP expertise from previous projects

By when does this need to be decided:
April 15 (need 6 months to plan and execute)

Who decides:
CTO (Robert), DevOps Lead (Alex)

Who should weigh in:
- DevOps team (implementation effort)
- Data Science team (ML workload changes)
- Backend team (service architecture impacts)
- Finance (actual cost estimates)

# Decision Doc: AWS to GCP Migration

## Options
- Option A: Migrate everything by end of Q3 2026
- Option B: Hybrid approach (dev/test on GCP, production on AWS)
- Option C: Don't migrate, optimize AWS spend

## Tradeoffs Table
| Factor | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|--------|----------|----------|----------|
| Cost Savings | $180k/year | $90k/year | $0 |
| Implementation Time | 6 months | 3 months | 0 |
| Risk | Medium | Low | None |
| Engineering Hours | 500 | 200 | 40 |

## Input from Data Science Team
"ML workloads are 60% of our AWS bill. GCP's TPU pricing
is 3x cheaper than AWS GPU pricing. Full migration would
save ~$120k/year. If we only migrate ML, savings are $110k."

## Input from DevOps
"We can use Google Cloud Migrate to transfer existing VMs
in ~2-3 months. This is low-risk. Database migration is harder
(RDS + data replication), estimate 6-8 weeks."

## Input from Finance
"Our current AWS spend: $600k/year
GCP equivalent: $420k/year (30% savings)
- ML workloads: $310k → $100k (68% savings!)
- Storage: $180k → $120k (33% savings)
- Compute: $110k → $95k (14% savings)

Migration costs (one-time):
- 500 engineering hours at $150/hr loaded cost = $75k
- Tools + consulting = $20k
- Total one-time: $95k

Payback period: ~6-7 months"

Input open: March 15-17

From Backend Team:
"Half our services use AWS-specific features (DynamoDB,
Lambda, SQS). Full migration requires rearchitecting.
How aggressively do we want to go?"

From Data Science Team:
"We vote for Option A (full migration) because ML cost
savings are too good to pass up."

From Finance (updated):
"If we do phased approach, we can spread costs and
demonstrate value before full commitment."

# DECISION: AWS to GCP Migration

Decision: Option B (Phased approach)
Phase 1: Migrate ML workloads to GCP (Q2 2026, 12 weeks)
Phase 2: Evaluate, plan core infrastructure (Q3 2026)
Phase 3: Conditional - full migration if Phase 1 successful (Q4 2026)

Decided By: Robert (CTO)
Date: March 18, 2026

Key Reasoning:
1. ML cost savings ($110k/year) are too significant to ignore
2. Phased approach reduces risk by learning before full commitment
3. Phase 1 success proves feasibility, eases Phase 2-3
4. Finance can report quick wins (ML savings) while planning broader migration

What Happens Next:
- Alex (DevOps): Infrastructure assessment for ML workloads (Mar 21-24)
- Finance: Detailed cost model for Phase 1 (Mar 21-23)
- Data Science: Data pipeline migration plan (Mar 21-28)
- All teams: Project kick-off April 1

Timeline:
- Phase 1: April-June 2026 (ML on GCP)
- Phase 1 review: July 1 (decide on Phase 2)
- Phase 2: July-September (planning, demo projects)
- Phase 3: October-December (if approved, full migration)