One suggestion if we're gonna standardize around this format. Avoid the double negatives. In some cases author says "avoided XYZ" and then the judgment was "no regrets". Too many layers for me to parse there. Instead, I suggest each section being the product that was used. If you regret that product, in the details is where you mention the product you should have used. Or you have another section for product ABC and you provide the context by saying "we adopted ABC after we abandoned XYZ".
I don't recommend trying to categorize into general areas like logging, postmortems, etc. Just do a top-level section for each product.
One suggestion if we're gonna standardize around this format. Avoid the double negatives. In some cases author says "avoided XYZ" and then the judgment was "no regrets". Too many layers for me to parse there. Instead, I suggest each section being the product that was used. If you regret that product, in the details is where you mention the product you should have used. Or you have another section for product ABC and you provide the context by saying "we adopted ABC after we abandoned XYZ".
I don't recommend trying to categorize into general areas like logging, postmortems, etc. Just do a top-level section for each product.