[Docs] Add DR002 for versioning in codegen

Part of OpenAssetIO#88. Consolidate the discussion, provoked by iterations of the
design proposal in OpenAssetIO#90, into a decision record.

Signed-off-by: David Feltell <[email protected]>

Author: feltech

decisions/DR002-Versioning-traits-and-specifications-codegen.md

@@ -0,0 +1,231 @@
+# DR025 Versioning Traits and Specification - generated view classes
+
+- **Status:** Decided
+- **Impact:** High
+- **Driver:** @feltech
+- **Approver:** @elliotcmorris @themissingcow
+- **Outcome:** Traits and specifications will be versioned independent
+  of the schema, there will be no concept of a schema version, and
+  Trait/Specification view classes will be generated with version
+  suffixes on the class name.
+
+## Background
+
+The medium of data exchange between a host and a manager is a logically
+opaque data blob, i.e. a `TraitsData` object. In order to extract
+information
+from this object, Trait and/or Specification view classes must be
+used[^1]. These classes wrap a `TraitsData` instance, and provide a
+suite of accessor and mutator methods that are relevant to the target
+trait. The classes are generated from a YAML schema (e.g. see
+[traits.yml](../traits.yml)).
+
+Hosts and managers may use different versions of the schema, and hence
+different versions of the view classes, and yet still wish to work
+together.
+
+This decision record follows on from a previous decision (OpenAssetIO
+[DR023](https://github.com/OpenAssetIO/OpenAssetIO/blob/main/doc/decisions/DR023-Versioning-traits-and-specifications-method.md))
+that communicating a trait's version should be done by bundling the
+version number with the data blob that is communicated across the API,
+i.e. within `TraitsData`, most likely by appending the version number to
+the unique trait ID.
+
+With this previous decision in mind, we then need to decide on how the
+trait versions are represented in the high level interface, i.e. in
+the definition and usage of Trait/Specification view classes.
+
+A motivating example should make this problem clear.
+
+[^1]: In reality, a `TraitsData` is a simple dictionary-like structure,
+and the `TraitsData` type has a low-level interface for interacting with
+it, but usage of this is discouraged.
+
+### Motivating example
+
+An example usage of the current form of these generated classes might
+be:
+
+```python
+url = LocatableContentTrait(trait_data).getLocation()
+```
+
+Imagine that we want to rename the LocatableContent trait's `"location"`
+property to a more descriptive `"url"` property, hence changing the
+generated view class's method from `getLocation` to `getUrl`.
+
+Given that hosts and managers are developed independently, we may end up
+with a situation where one side is setting `"location"` (using
+`setLocation`) in the data, handing it over to the other side, who then
+attempts to read `"url"` (using `getUrl`). I.e. we have a version
+mismatch.
+
+There is therefore an incompatibility at the data layer (i.e. field
+names differ for the same semantic information). With C++, the data
+layer is where the incompatibility ends. The Trait/Specification view
+classes are private utility classes whose symbols should not be
+exported, so there will be no source or binary incompatibility.
+
+However, with Python there is no such concept of a private, build-time
+only, class. The manager plugin and host application must use the same
+`openassetio-mediacreation` distribution package in the Python
+environment (not considering, for the moment, custom vendoring). So one
+side or the other will hit an `AttributeError` exception when trying to
+use a method from the version they developed against, rather than the
+version installed into the environment.
+
+In order to interoperate, previous versions of Trait/Specification view
+classes must be made available, so that fallback behaviour can be coded.
+In this example, the side that attempts to use the newer `getUrl` to
+read the data must be able to detect that it won't work and fall back to
+the previous version's `getLocation`.
+
+### Assumptions
+
+* A Trait/Specification view class is needed for each version, such
+  that a user can imbue a particular version of a trait in some data;
+  and can detect that a particular version of a trait is imbued in some
+  data.
+* Trait unique IDs will be suffixed with a version number. This means
+  two Trait view classes for the same trait, but for different versions,
+  will be treated as if they are entirely separate traits.
+  Version-agnostic utility functions may be added in the future, but it
+  is out of scope for now.
+* If a Specification view class is used to construct/imbue a trait
+  set/data, that data will _not_ have the Specification version encoded
+  in the data directly (only implicitly through the versioned IDs of the
+  composite traits).
+
+## Relevant data
+
+[OpenTimelineIO schema
+versioning](https://opentimelineio.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tutorials/otio-file-format-specification.html#example)
+is perhaps the closest analog. The version of the schema is appended to
+the schema ID whenever it appears within a OTIO JSON document.
+
+The options presented were arrived at by sketching a proposal in [a Pull
+Request](https://github.com/OpenAssetIO/OpenAssetIO-MediaCreation/pull/90),
+soliciting feedback, and iterating. The final form of that PR reflects
+the chosen option.
+
+## Options considered
+
+### Option 1 - Per schema versioning
+
+When traits or specifications in the YAML document are updated, a
+top-level schema version is incremented. During codegen, top-level
+namespaces are created by providing multiple YAML documents, one for
+each schema version.
+
+For example
+
+```python
+from openassetio_mediacreation.v1.traits.content import LocatableContent as LocatableContent_v1
+from openassetio_mediacreation.v2.traits.content import LocatableContent as LocatableContent_v2
+from openassetio_mediacreation.v2.specifications.twoDimensional import ImageSpecification
+```
+
+#### Pros
+
+- Tantalising possibility to use [Python namespace
+  packages](https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/guides/packaging-namespace-packages)
+  to allow different schema versions to be installed independently
+  side-by-side.
+- The schema version a specification comes from instantly tells you the
+  schema version of the constituent traits.
+- The YAML is kept small and focussed just on the latest versions.
+- Minimal changes to the `traitgen` tool and existing YAML documents.
+- Maintaining only the latest versions in the live YAML document
+  prevents accidental changes to old versions that could break backward
+  compatibility.
+- The consumer is in charge of deciding which versions they support.
+  I.e. once a host/manager determines that they no longer wish to
+  support a particular version, they can stop
+  generating/installing/bundling subpackages for it.
+- Once it is clear that a host/manager understands a particular schema
+  version (via `managementPolicy` or otherwise), the communicating
+  manager/host can be confident in using that schema version for other
+  traits/specifications.
+
+#### Cons
+
+- A source-incompatible breaking change, unless significant
+  special-casing is added.
+- Verbose when using two versions in the same source file, either
+  requiring use of qualified names (e.g. `v1.traits.LocatableContent`)
+  or additional aliasing (e.g. 
+ `from ... import LocatableContent as LocatableContent_v1`).
+- Not clear at-a-glance which traits have changed between schema
+  versions, e.g. it's not clear if
+  `v2.traits.content.LocatableContentTrait` is the same as
+  `v1.traits.content.LocatableContentTrait`.
+- Must compare multiple YAML documents side-by-side in order to discover
+  the history of changes to a particular trait/specification.
+- Traits/specifications that are unchanged between versions implies
+  duplicated code across namespaces (though likely simply aliased).
+- Independently generated/installed subpackages for each schema version
+  would mean that deprecation warnings could not be added to old
+  versions. This is mitigated if multiple versions are generated
+  together, where the older version can be detected and deprecation
+  warnings added by codegen.
+
+### Option 2 - Per Trait/Specification versioning
+
+A single YAML document is maintained, where each trait/specification
+definition branches off into a list of versions. Old
+trait/specification versions can be marked as deprecated and removed
+eventually, to prevent infinite growth.
+
+For example
+
+```python
+from openassetio_mediacreation.traits.content import LocatableContent_v1
+from openassetio_mediacreation.traits.content import LocatableContent_v2
+from openassetio_mediacreation.specifications.twoDimensional import ImageSpecification_v2
+```
+
+#### Pros
+
+- Fairly trivial to say that the first version "`_v1`" is equivalent to
+  "" (blank), and to ensure that v1's trait ID doesn't contain a version
+  tag, then e.g. the `LocatableContent` class continues to work as
+  before versioning was introduced, making this option fully source
+  compatible with legacy code. I.e. not a breaking change.
+- Placing versions alongside one-another in the YAML definition allows
+  easy discovery of the history of changes.
+- IDE code completion will list all versions of a Trait/Specification
+  view class next to one-another.
+
+#### Cons
+
+- No indication of the version of the constituent traits from the
+  version of a Specification view class.
+- Large change to `traitgen` tool and non-trivial breaking change to
+  YAML documents.
+- Keeping old versions in a living document (as opposed to e.g. git
+  history) is a potential source of accidental breakages to backward
+  compatibility.
+- Generating all possible versions bloats an application's distribution,
+  when it may only use a small subset of them.
+- Higher level branching on a schema version is never possible.
+- A specification's version must be bumped when a constituent trait has
+  a version bump, even if nothing else in the specification has changed.
+  Conceptually, specifications are trait version agnostic, but must
+  become version-aware for the purposes of codegen, which is
+  inconsistent.
+
+## Outcome
+
+We will implement Option 2 - Per Trait/Specification versioning. 
+
+A huge benefit is how much easier it is to make this solution a
+non-breaking change to current users.
+
+In addition, it has better discoverability through IDE code completion,
+and it is easier to view history through a single YAML document rather
+than across several documents.
+
+There will be a rather large change to the `traitgen` tool and the YAML
+JSON schema, causing a headache for any early adopters who are
+generating their own traits. However, this is less critical than changes
+to the generated output in use within pipelines.