TODO: Fill in ...'s, see other templates like https://github.com/iworkforthem/rfc and examples like https://ethereum.org/en/eips/ and https://www.python.org/dev/peps/

RFC Process

Many changes, including bug fixes, script changes and documentation improvements can be implemented and reviewed via the normal GitLab merge request workflow.

Some changes though are "substantial", and we ask that these be put through a bit of a design process and produce a consensus.

The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for new features and changes to enter the infrastructure.

Active RFC List

When you need to follow this process

You need to follow this process if you intend to make "substantial" change. What constitutes a "substantial" change is evolving based on community norms, but may include the following.

• ...

Some changes do not require an RFC:

• Small changes that are covered by the normal GitLab merge request workflow

What the process is

In short, to get a substantial change made to the infrastructure, one must first get the RFC merged into the RFC repo as a markdown file. At that point the RFC is 'active' and may be implemented with the goal of eventual inclusion into the infrastructure.

• Clone the RFC repo https://github.com/ghostinthewires/Rfcs-Template
• Copy 0000-template.md to rfc/0000-my-feature.md (where 'my-feature' is descriptive. don't assign an RFC number yet).
• Fill in the RFC. Put care into the details: RFCs that do not present convincing motivation, demonstrate understanding of the impact of the design, or are disingenuous about the drawbacks or alternatives tend to be poorly-received.
• Submit a merge request (Please name your branch the same as your RFC). As a merge request the RFC will receive design feedback from the Team, and the author should be prepared to revise it in response.
• Build consensus and integrate feedback. RFCs that have broad support are much more likely to make progress than those that don't receive any comments.
• Eventually, the Team will decide whether the RFC is a candidate for inclusion into the infrastructure.
• An RFC can be modified based upon feedback from the Team.
• An RFC may be rejected by the Team after discussion has settled and comments have been made summarizing the rationale for rejection. A member of the Team should then close the RFC's associated merge request.
• An RFC may be accepted by the Team. A Team member will merge the RFC's associated merge request, at which point the RFC will become 'active'.

The RFC life-cycle

Once an RFC becomes active then authors may begin to plan the change. Becoming 'active' is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not mean the change will ultimately be made to the infrastructure ; it does mean that the Team has agreed to it in principle and are amenable to the change.

Furthermore, the fact that a given RFC has been accepted and is 'active' implies nothing about what priority is assigned to its implementation, nor whether anybody is currently working on it.

Modifications to active RFC's can be done in followup MR's. We strive to write each RFC in a manner that it will reflect the final design of the change; but the nature of the process means that we cannot expect every merged RFC to actually reflect what the end result will be at the time of the change; therefore we try to keep each RFC document somewhat in sync with the change as planned, tracking such changes via followup merge requests to the document.

Implementing an RFC

The author of an RFC is not obligated to implement it. Of course, the RFC author (like any other Engineer) is welcome to post an implementation for review after the RFC has been accepted.

If you are interested in working on the implementation for an 'active' RFC, but cannot determine if someone else is already working on it, feel free to ask (e.g. by leaving a comment on it).

Reviewing RFC's

...