# ADR-011: Optional Seller Management Module Status: Accepted Date: 2026-07-26 ## Context The platform today has a two-level hierarchy: Platform → Marketplace (tenant), per ADR-001. Some marketplaces will eventually need a third, optional level: individual Sellers operating storefronts within one marketplace (a marketplace-of-marketplaces / multi-vendor model). Not every marketplace needs this — most tenants today have none. Seller Management must not become a second tenancy model. ADR-001 already established that tenant identity is backend-resolved from request Host and the frontend never passes or resolves tenant identity itself. Introducing sellers must not weaken that discipline or introduce a second, parallel resolution mechanism the frontend has to reason about. ## Decision Seller Management is an **optional platform capability module**, not a new tenancy tier equal to Marketplace: ``` Platform └── Marketplace (tenant) — always present, resolved by backend (ADR-001) └── Seller (optional) — 0..N per marketplace, resolved by backend ``` - **Marketplace remains the sole primary tenant.** A seller is a child scope of exactly one marketplace, never a sibling of Marketplace and never resolved independently of it. - **The frontend never resolves seller identity itself** — same rule as tenant resolution (ADR-001). The backend decides whether the current request scope is marketplace-level or seller-level and reflects that decision in the bootstrap response. - **The frontend consumes bootstrap only.** No new endpoint, header, or client-side resolution logic is introduced by this ADR. If a seller scope applies, `BootstrapConfig.seller` (see `SellerConfig`) is present; if not, it's absent. There is no other channel. - **Gated by a module flag, not scattered conditionals.** The capability is controlled by one typed flag — `BootstrapConfig.modules.sellerManagement. enabled` (see `PlatformModulesConfig`) — checked in one place if/when seller-aware behavior is built, never as ad hoc `if (tenant.id === 'x')` or similar marketplace-specific conditionals anywhere in feature code. This follows the same capability-guard discipline ADR-009 already established for feature flags. ## Backward Compatibility (non-negotiable) - `modules` and `seller` are both optional fields on `BootstrapConfig`. Existing marketplaces whose bootstrap response never includes them are unaffected — untyped-absent is not a special case to handle, it's the default. - `DEFAULT_PLATFORM_MODULES_CONFIG` defaults `sellerManagement.enabled` to `false`. A marketplace that has never heard of this feature, and a marketplace where the backend explicitly disables it, behave identically: no new routes, no new menu entries, no new API calls, no visual change. - No existing `BootstrapConfig` field, route, guard, or component changes as a result of this ADR. This ADR adds types; it changes nothing that already runs. ## Scope of this ADR This ADR and its accompanying typed contracts (`PlatformModulesConfig`, `SellerManagementModuleConfig`, `SellerConfig`) are **architecture only**: - No UI is introduced — no seller-facing pages, no admin seller-management screens, no navigation entries. - No backend is implemented — no endpoints, no seller data model, no resolution logic. - No business logic is introduced — no seller CRUD, no seller-scoped permissions, no seller onboarding flow. Those are all future work, gated behind `modules.sellerManagement.enabled`, and each will need its own ADR/implementation pass once the module is actually being built out (routing strategy under a seller scope, admin UI, backend data model and resolution, permission model for seller-level roles). This ADR exists so that future work has a typed foundation to build on without retrofitting the platform/marketplace hierarchy after the fact. ## Consequences Positive: - Marketplaces that don't need multi-vendor support pay zero cost — no new code path executes, no new field is even present in their bootstrap response. - Future Seller Management work has a settled hierarchy and typed contract to build against instead of ad hoc per-feature decisions about where "seller" fits. - Consistent with the platform's existing capability-guard discipline (ADR-009) — one flag, checked in one place, not scattered conditionals. Negative: - Adds two optional fields to `BootstrapConfig` that most of the codebase will never populate — acceptable, matches the existing pattern of several other optional bootstrap fields (`header?`, `catalog?`, `layout?`, etc.). - Defers real design decisions (seller-scoped routing, seller admin permissions, seller data ownership) to whenever the module is actually implemented — intentional; this ADR does not pre-invent that design. ## Compliance Requirements - No component, facade, or service may branch on marketplace identity or seller identity directly. All seller-aware behavior, once built, must check `modules.sellerManagement.enabled` (or a capability-guard built on top of it) as the single gate. - No frontend code may attempt to resolve which seller is active by itself (URL parsing, local storage, guessed convention, etc.) — that information only ever comes from `BootstrapConfig.seller`, backend-resolved, exactly like tenant resolution today. - Any future work that adds seller-facing routes, UI, or backend calls must keep all of it inert and unreachable while `modules.sellerManagement. enabled` is `false`, with no exception.