mirror of
https://github.com/microsoft/agent-framework.git
synced 2026-06-16 21:04:09 +08:00
Eduard van Valkenburg
a2856d3b92
* restructure: Python samples into progressive 01-05 layout - 01-get-started/: 6 numbered steps (hello agent → hosting) - 02-agents/: all agent concept samples (tools, middleware, providers, etc.) - 03-workflows/: ALL existing workflow samples preserved as-is - 04-hosting/: azure-functions, durabletask, a2a - 05-end-to-end/: demos, evaluation, hosted agents - Old files moved to _to_delete/ for review - Added AGENTS.md with structure documentation - autogen-migration/ and semantic-kernel-migration/ preserved at root * fix: switch to AzureOpenAI Foundry, fix CI failures - Switch all 01-get-started samples to AzureOpenAIResponsesClient with Azure AI Foundry project endpoint (AZURE_AI_PROJECT_ENDPOINT + AZURE_OPENAI_RESPONSES_DEPLOYMENT_NAME + AzureCliCredential) - Add _to_delete/ and 05-end-to-end/ to pyrightconfig.samples.json excludes - Fix test paths in packages/ that referenced old getting_started/ dirs: durabletask conftest + streaming test, azurefunctions conftest, devui conftest + capture_messages + openai_sdk_integration - Fix workflow_as_agent_human_in_the_loop.py import (sibling import) - Update hosting READMEs and tool comment paths - Replace root README.md with new structure overview - Update AGENTS.md to document Azure OpenAI Foundry as default provider * cleanup: remove _to_delete folder, copy resource files to active dirs All files in _to_delete/ were either: - Exact duplicates of files in the new structure (240 files) - Same file with only comment path updates (100 files) - One import-fix diff (workflow_as_agent_human_in_the_loop.py) - One superseded minimal_sample.py Resource files (sample.pdf, countries.json, employees.pdf, weather.json) copied to 02-agents/sample_assets/ and 02-agents/resources/ since active samples reference them. * fix: address PR review comments, centralize resources, remove root duplicates - Fix type annotation in 04_memory.py (string union -> proper types) - Fix old sample paths in observability files - Fix grammar/spelling in observability samples - Move sample_assets/ and resources/ to shared/ folder - Remove 8 duplicate observability files from 02-agents root - Update resource path references in multimodal_input and provider samples * fix: update broken links from old getting_started paths to new structure - Update relative paths in READMEs: getting_started/ → 01-get-started/, 02-agents/, 03-workflows/, 04-hosting/, 05-end-to-end/ - Fix absolute GitHub URLs in package READMEs - Fix broken link in ollama package README * fix: convert absolute GitHub URLs to relative paths for link checker Absolute URLs to python/samples/ on main branch 404 until PR merges. Converted to relative paths that linkspector can verify locally. * fix: update link for handoff sample moved to orchestrations/ * fix: update chatkit-integration README path from demos/ to 05-end-to-end/ * fix: update broken links in orchestrations README to match flat directory structure
a2856d3b92
·
2026-02-12 17:36:36 +00:00
History
Architectural Decision Records (ADRs)
An Architectural Decision (AD) is a justified software design choice that addresses a functional or non-functional requirement that is architecturally significant. An Architectural Decision Record (ADR) captures a single AD and its rationale.
For more information see
How are we using ADRs to track technical decisions?
- Copy docs/decisions/adr-template.md to docs/decisions/NNNN-title-with-dashes.md, where NNNN indicates the next number in sequence.
- Check for existing PR's to make sure you use the correct sequence number.
- There is also a short form template docs/decisions/adr-short-template.md
- Edit NNNN-title-with-dashes.md.
- Status must initially be
proposed - List of
decidersmust include the github ids of the people who will sign off on the decision. - The relevant EM and architect must be listed as deciders or informed of all decisions.
- You should list the names or github ids of all partners who were consulted as part of the decision.
- Keep the list of
decidersshort. You can also list people who wereconsultedorinformedabout the decision.
- Status must initially be
- For each option list the good, neutral and bad aspects of each considered alternative.
- Detailed investigations can be included in the
More Informationsection inline or as links to external documents.
- Detailed investigations can be included in the
- Share your PR with the deciders and other interested parties.
- Deciders must be listed as required reviewers.
- The status must be updated to
acceptedonce a decision is agreed and the date must also be updated. - Approval of the decision is captured using PR approval.
- Decisions can be changed later and superseded by a new ADR. In this case it is useful to record any negative outcomes in the original ADR.