docs(known-instances): Added SAP to RFC pattern

[dellagustin-sap]

No description provided.

[welcome]

💖 Thanks for opening this pull request! 💖 The InnerSource Commons community really appreciates your time and effort to contribute to the project. Please make sure you have read our Contributing Guidelines.

If you are submitting a new pattern, the following things will help get your pull request across the finish line! 🏁

• Confirm that you have used our pattern template. Please remove any placeholder text and sections that your pattern did not need.
• We run a number of automated checks on your PR. Please review the output of those checks on the PR itself, and see if any issues got flagged that you can fix yourself.
• Make sure you have added your new pattern to the list of patterns in the main README.md. If you are unsure where to add your pattern, just let us know by commenting on your PR and we will help you.

This project has a small number of maintainers, volunteering their time to this project. So please be patient and we will get back to you as soon as we can. If we don't acknowledge this pull request after 7 days, feel free to chat to us about it in our Slack workspace.

[dellagustin-sap]

@michael-basil , you asked if SAP could be included as known instance, you may want to review this PR.

[dellagustin-sap]

I recommend to squash this when merging, as I had to send a commit to fix a linter finding.

[michael-basil]

Looks great @dellagustin-sap - #sap 😁

[spier]

Thanks for this PR @dellagustin-sap. Left a suggestion inline.

Btw, is the CPA that you describe in the blog post similar to an industry body that consists of representatives of different companies to define a standard for the greater benefit of everybody involved? Wondering if the CPA is a similar idea but implemented within a single org.

[spier]

Suggested change

- **SAP** - As described in the blog post [Cross-Product Architecture: Embracing Conway's Law for Better Software Architecture][sap-cpa], SAP has a mature tool-assisted process for document review across teams. It is primarily used for the review of Architecture Decision Records (ADR) originating from cross-team work done on the Cross-Product Architecture collaboration model. This means that the review process in not easily available for decisions on small projects. Also, the documents are not by rule related to InnerSource projects. That means it is not a universal solution for engineering decision making in the company and also not a 1:1 fit for this pattern, but close enough to be mentioned as known instance.

- **SAP** (03/2024) - SAP has a mature tool-assisted process for document review across teams. It is primarily used for the review of Architecture Decision Records (ADR) originating from cross-team work done on the Cross-Product Architecture collaboration model. Some noteworthy implementation differences from this pattern: The review process is not easily available for decisions on small projects. Also, the documents are not restricted to InnerSource projects only. - As described in the blog post [Cross-Product Architecture: Embracing Conway's Law for Better Software Architecture][sap-cpa].

Proposing a number of changes. In summary:

• moving the link to the end
• adding a date of when we found this known instance (i.e. when you shared it). we don't do this consistently for all Known instances in all patterns yet but it may help us in the future when we try to learn how pattern adoption is spreading through different orgs.
• Removing the qualifying sentence at the end. The pattern does not claim to be a universal solution for all engineering decisions. Further all implementations of this pattern (and any pattern for that matter) have some differences to the solution outlined in the pattern. That is to be expected, as the solution has to be adapted to the specific environment at the given organization. We have not highlighted this in other Known Instances either, therefore we don't have to do it here either.

Hope my explanations help and you like the changes.