docs: model install adr

adr/Makefile

@@ -1,11 +1,14 @@
 newadr:
 	@echo "Initiating an ADR..."
 	@last_number=$$(ls $(CURDIR)/adr-[0-9][0-9][0-9]-* | sort -V | tail -n 1 | cut -d '-' -f 2); \
+	last_number=$$(echo $$last_number | sed 's/^0*//'); \
 	next_number=$$(printf "%03d" $$(( $$last_number + 1 ))); \
 	read -p "Enter ADR title: " title; \
-	cp $(CURDIR)/adr-template.md $(CURDIR)/adr-$$next_number-$$title.md
-# newadr:
-# 	@echo "Initiating an ADR..."
-# 	@read -p "Enter ADR number (e.g. 001): " number; \
-# 	read -p "Enter ADR title: " title; \
-# 	cp $(CURDIR)/adr-template.md $(CURDIR)/adr-$${number}-$${title}.md
+	title=$$(echo $$title | tr ' ' '-'); \
+	cp $(CURDIR)/adr-template.md $(CURDIR)/adr-$$next_number-$$title.md; \
+	date=$$(date +%Y-%m-%d); \
+	usernames=$$(git config user.name); \
+	sed -i '' 's/{ADR-NUM}/'$$next_number'/g' $(CURDIR)/adr-$$next_number-$$title.md; \
+	sed -i '' 's/{TITLE}/'$$title'/g' $(CURDIR)/adr-$$next_number-$$title.md; \
+	sed -i '' 's/{DATE}/'$$date'/g' $(CURDIR)/adr-$$next_number-$$title.md; \
+	sed -i '' 's/{USERNAMES}/'$$usernames'/g' $(CURDIR)/adr-$$next_number-$$title.md

adr/adr-005-model-installation-ux.md

@@ -1,29 +0,0 @@
-# ADR {ADR-NUM}: {TITLE}
-
-## Changelog
-- {date}: {changelog}
-
-## Authors
-- @usernames
-
-## Status
-
-What is the status, such as proposed, accepted, rejected, deprecated, superseded, etc.?
-
-{Proposed|Accepted|Rejected}
-
-## Context
-
-What is the issue that we're seeing that is motivating this decision or change?
-
-## Decision
-
-What is the change that we're proposing and/or doing?
-
-## Consequences
-
-What becomes easier or more difficult to do because of this change?
-
-## Alternatives
-
-## Reference

adr/adr-005-model-installation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# ADR 005: model-installation
+
+## Changelog
+
+- 2023-10-18: Initial draft
+
+## Authors
+
+- 0xSage
+
+## Status
+
+Proposed
+
+## Context
+
+There are a few issues with our current model installation method (hardcoding jsons in /models repo):
+
+- Users want to add their own model binaries
+- Maintaining /models is too manual
+
+## Decision
+
+Let Users download models on their own & manually import them to Jan via a "add a model" UI
+
+Links:
+
+- Github issue: https://github.com/janhq/jan/issues/359
+- Related issue: https://github.com/janhq/jan/issues/304
+- Designs: https://www.figma.com/file/JdK7cNIBeVdYeHxKiYeWtk/JAN---Web?type=design&node-id=4092-58218&mode=design&t=8OmFSG0E6I8Y3IjY-0
+
+## Consequences
+
+Closed alternate solutions:
+
+- https://github.com/janhq/jan/issues/328
+
+## Alternatives
+
+Thinking through the model selection experience, there are a few possibilities:
+
+1. [current] We hardcode models (via Github) to show up in Explore Models => unnecessarily manual, missing models users want
+1. We mirror HF models for a faster download => users can also do nitro add llama2
+1. [CHOSEN] Users download models on their own & manually import them to Jan via a "add a model" UI => I like this option actually
+1. [LATER] Users paste in a HF link and download the model in Explore Models => do we still render model cards for them?
+1. Users manage their own models folder, e.g. /Users/nicole/models, then they set folder path in Jan. => this one needs a lot of designs/fe work
+
+## Reference

adr/adr-template.md

@@ -1,10 +1,12 @@
 # ADR {ADR-NUM}: {TITLE}
 
 ## Changelog
-- {date}: {changelog}
+
+- {DATE}: Initial draft
 
 ## Authors
-- @usernames
+
+- {USERNAMES}
 
 ## Status