Hi Khalil,

I just started recently going hard studying software design and architecture, and I came across your article https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/software-design/, it is really good! I like it! I've bookmarked it and now watching your repo. 👍

I have suggestion! :) can we make the size of the boxes under Map a little bit bigger? Some of the text are hard to read, I think it would be nice to make it a little bit bigger similar to developer-roadmap.

That's all for now, will continue watching this repo from now on. :)

Thanks!

Hi,

This resource was pointed out to me by a colleague, it's an excellent resource, great job. I humbly offer the following as constructive feedback - very happy to discuss.

I wanted to offer some comments, specifically stages 8 & 9, Architectural Patterns & Enterprise Patterns:

1. I don't think the arch and ent arch patterns you mention are really that different - they are all just patterns. So I don't see why you'd distinguish between them. I think its particularly problematic as a resource for aspiring architects who will already be navigation quite a lot.
2. Obviously the patterns listed are not an authoritative list - which is fine, maybe mention that.
3. Use Cases isn't a pattern - at least not that I am aware of.
4. Domain Driven Design is a method / approach, not a pattern.
5. ORM's hmmm, more of a technical solution type / approach to data access. I guess it's "architecty" but I'm not convinced it's a slam-dunk for an architecture pattern.
6. If you wanted more architectural styles, REST would be an obvious one to add, as would microservices.

When you say Software design & architect - are you meaning software architect as opposed to solution architect?

I also wonder if there's a case for putting architectural patterns ahead of styles? If the general idea is to introduce increasingly complex ideas, or ideas that build on the previous ones, then patterns would more naturally fit before styles in my view. Any develop that understands design patterns in the coding sense will have no issue understanding them in the architectural sense; styles is a bit different though - more open-ended and requiring interpretation.

There's other topics which might be options to include, but I'm not sure how you'd classify them. Stuff like the 4+1 model, and the "Views & Perspectives" approach to thinking about and defining architectures.

Best Regards,
Adrian

https://morphological.wordpress.com/