docs: add ADR-007 for service classification patterns

Document the architectural decision for classifying BFF services:
- Facades: unified entry points for integration subsystems
- Orchestrators: coordinate workflows across multiple systems
- Aggregators: read-only data composition from multiple sources
- Services: single-responsibility operations

Includes dependency rules, naming conventions, and implementation examples.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
barsa 2026-01-15 18:53:37 +09:00
parent a23a5593f7
commit b885e9c34b

View File

@ -0,0 +1,236 @@
# ADR-007: Service Classification (Facades, Orchestrators, Aggregators)
**Date**: 2025-01-15
**Status**: Accepted
## Context
The BFF layer communicates with multiple external systems (WHMCS, Salesforce, Freebit, JapanPost) and coordinates complex workflows. Without clear naming conventions, services become:
- Difficult to understand at a glance
- Hard to know what they're responsible for
- Inconsistent in their patterns
Many "services" were actually orchestrating multiple systems but named generically (e.g., `SalesforceService`, `FreebitOperationsService`).
## Decision
**Classify services by their architectural role** using clear naming conventions:
| Type | Suffix | Purpose | Dependencies |
| ---------------- | --------------- | ------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------- |
| **Facade** | `*Facade` | Unified entry point for an integration subsystem | Multiple services within same integration |
| **Orchestrator** | `*Orchestrator` | Coordinate workflows across multiple systems | Multiple services/integrations |
| **Aggregator** | `*Aggregator` | Combine read-only data from multiple sources | Multiple services (read-only) |
| **Service** | `*Service` | Single-responsibility operations | 1-2 integrations max |
## Rationale
### Why Facades?
Integration modules (WHMCS, Salesforce, Freebit) contain multiple internal services. A **Facade** provides:
- **Single entry point**: Consumers don't need to know internal structure
- **Consistent interface**: Unified error handling, logging, queueing
- **Encapsulation**: Internal service changes don't affect consumers
```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Facade abstracts internal complexity
@Injectable()
export class WhmcsConnectionFacade {
// Single entry point for ALL WHMCS API operations
// Handles queueing, error handling, request prioritization
}
// Consumers use the facade
constructor(private readonly whmcs: WhmcsConnectionFacade) {}
```
### Why Orchestrators?
Complex workflows span multiple systems. An **Orchestrator**:
- Coordinates multi-step operations
- Manages transaction boundaries
- Handles cross-system error recovery
```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Orchestrator for cross-system workflow
@Injectable()
export class OrderFulfillmentOrchestrator {
constructor(
private readonly salesforce: SalesforceFacade,
private readonly whmcs: WhmcsOrderService,
private readonly freebit: FreebitFacade
) {}
async executeFulfillment(orderId: string) {
// Coordinates SF → WHMCS → Freebit workflow
}
}
```
### Why Aggregators?
Dashboard and profile endpoints combine data from multiple sources. An **Aggregator**:
- Is **read-only** (no mutations)
- Combines data from multiple services
- Handles partial failures gracefully
```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Aggregator for read-only data composition
@Injectable()
export class MeStatusAggregator {
constructor(
private readonly users: UsersFacade,
private readonly orders: OrderOrchestrator,
private readonly payments: WhmcsPaymentService
) {}
async getStatusForUser(userId: string): Promise<MeStatus> {
// Combines user, order, payment data for dashboard
}
}
```
### Alternatives Considered
| Approach | Pros | Cons |
| ----------------------------------------------- | ---------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
| **Generic `*Service`** | Familiar | No architectural clarity |
| **Layer-based (Repository/Service/Controller)** | Simple | Doesn't capture orchestration patterns |
| **Role-based naming** | Clear responsibilities | More files, learning curve |
## Consequences
### Positive
- Clear responsibilities from class name
- Easier onboarding (developers know what each type does)
- Consistent patterns across modules
- Better testability (mock entire facades)
### Negative
- Refactoring existing services required
- Developers must learn classification rules
- More specific naming conventions to follow
## Implementation
### Integration Facades
Located in `integrations/{provider}/facades/`:
```
integrations/
├── whmcs/
│ ├── facades/
│ │ └── whmcs.facade.ts # WhmcsConnectionFacade
│ └── services/ # Internal services
├── salesforce/
│ ├── facades/
│ │ └── salesforce.facade.ts # SalesforceFacade
│ └── services/
└── freebit/
├── facades/
│ └── freebit.facade.ts # FreebitFacade
└── services/
```
### Module Orchestrators
Located in module services or dedicated orchestrators folder:
```typescript
// modules/orders/services/order-fulfillment-orchestrator.service.ts
@Injectable()
export class OrderFulfillmentOrchestrator {}
// modules/subscriptions/sim-management/services/sim-orchestrator.service.ts
@Injectable()
export class SimOrchestrator {}
```
### Aggregators
Currently in their modules, planned for dedicated `aggregators/` folder:
```typescript
// modules/me-status/me-status.service.ts
@Injectable()
export class MeStatusAggregator {}
// modules/users/infra/user-profile.service.ts
@Injectable()
export class UserProfileAggregator {}
```
### Dependency Rules
```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ALLOWED IMPORTS │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ Controllers │
│ ↓ (can import) │
│ Orchestrators / Aggregators / Facades │
│ ↓ (can import) │
│ Services │
│ ↓ (can import) │
│ Integration Facades │
│ ↓ (can import) │
│ Integration Entity Services │
│ │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ FORBIDDEN │
│ │
│ ✗ Controllers → Integration Services (use facades) │
│ ✗ Services → Orchestrators (wrong direction) │
│ ✗ Aggregators → Mutation methods │
│ ✗ Integration Services → Module Services │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
## Naming Conventions
### DO
```typescript
// Integration entry points
export class WhmcsConnectionFacade {}
export class SalesforceFacade {}
export class FreebitFacade {}
// Cross-system workflows
export class OrderFulfillmentOrchestrator {}
export class SimOrchestrator {}
// Read-only data composition
export class MeStatusAggregator {}
export class UserProfileAggregator {}
// Single-responsibility operations
export class WhmcsInvoiceService {}
export class SalesforceOrderService {}
```
### DON'T
```typescript
// ❌ Generic names that hide complexity
export class SalesforceService {} // What does it do?
export class FreebitOperationsService {} // Operations = everything?
export class MeStatusService {} // Service doing aggregation
// ❌ Orchestrators named as services
export class SimOrchestratorService {} // Drop the Service suffix
```
## Related
- [ADR-006: Thin Controllers](./006-thin-controllers.md)
- [BFF Integration Patterns](../development/bff/integration-patterns.md)