Skip to content

docs: rewrite comparison.md to match ADR 0011's positioning decision (#1053) - #1071

Merged
masukai merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/1053-comparison-rewrite
Sep 1, 2026
Merged

docs: rewrite comparison.md to match ADR 0011's positioning decision (#1053)#1071
masukai merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/1053-comparison-rewrite

Conversation

@masukai

@masukai masukai commented Sep 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Closes #1053 (the remaining scope, after an earlier correction comment narrowed it — the tagline/README part of ADR 0011's follow-up already shipped in #1010).

docs/guides/comparison.md was exactly the artifact ADR 0011 argues against: a literal feature-matrix table against Census/Hightouch/Polytomic, including a "Destinations: 22 vs 200+ / 200+" row — the losing checkbox-comparison framing the ADR names as a real risk.

What changed

  • Removed the feature-matrix table and the "when to choose / not choose" bullet lists.
  • Replaced with the ADR's single structural claim: drt never routes data through a drt-hosted intermediary, unlike commercial reverse-ETL tools — plus the three things that follow from it (no per-row bill, no UI, no audience builder).
  • Added a "Why not a UI, a hosted runtime, or an audience builder?" FAQ section, closing the ADR's own follow-up item docs: add CHANGELOG.md for v0.1.0 #2.
  • Kept the "Read-only source access, by design" section unchanged — it already matched the ADR's single-factual-claim style.
  • Corrected connector counts in the factual "Connector coverage" section: 13 sources / 34 destinations (was stale at 10/22-23), matching README's current counts.

Verification

  • pytest tests/unit/test_docs_html.py — passes
  • Manually verified both ADR links resolve and no other file links to this page (so no other cross-references need updating)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

masukai and others added 2 commits September 1, 2026 12:50
…1053)

Replaces the line-by-line feature-matrix table against named
competitors with the ADR's single structural claim (no drt-hosted
intermediary) and a FAQ closing its "why not a UI / audience builder"
follow-up item. Corrects stale connector counts (13 sources, 34
destinations) along the way.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…tors

Adversarial review caught that Polytomic and RudderStack Reverse ETL
both document genuine self-hosted/on-premises deployment options
(verified against their own docs), contradicting the blanket claim
that all four named competitors route data through a hosted service.
Reframed the core claim around drt's own architecture (no hosted
service to opt out of, not a tier) rather than asserting a specific
behavior for every named competitor.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Sep 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

@masukai
masukai merged commit c355c72 into main Sep 1, 2026
9 checks passed
@masukai
masukai deleted the docs/1053-comparison-rewrite branch September 1, 2026 04:22
@github-actions github-actions Bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 1, 2026
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

chore(docs): ADR 0011's follow-up (tagline/FAQ copy) untracked; docs/guides/comparison.md contradicts the ADR's own decision

1 participant