Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Doc: Proposed RFC Github issue template #3164

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

andy-k-improving
Copy link
Contributor

@andy-k-improving andy-k-improving commented Nov 20, 2024

Description

Aim to provide a handy Github issue template for RFC, in order to standardize the existing feature intake process, to encourage contributors to submit a RFC when doing any major feature to get the consent / alignment from the community, in order to lower the risk / complexity of the implementation.

Existing Github template:
image

Related Issues

N/A

Check List

  • New functionality includes testing.
  • New functionality has been documented.
  • New functionality has javadoc added.
  • New functionality has a user manual doc added.
  • API changes companion pull request created.
  • Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff.
  • Public documentation issue/PR created.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Signed-off-by: Andy Kwok <[email protected]>
@YANG-DB
Copy link
Member

YANG-DB commented Nov 28, 2024

@penghuo @dai-chen any thoughts ?

@YANG-DB
Copy link
Member

YANG-DB commented Dec 4, 2024

@vamsi-amazon @ps48 @Swiddis can you plz review ?
thanks

@YANG-DB
Copy link
Member

YANG-DB commented Dec 19, 2024

@acarbonetto can you please review ?
thanks

Copy link
Collaborator

@Swiddis Swiddis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

suggestion: I'd like to see more room for discussing alternative solutions from an RFC process

This seems to more-or-less be focused on writing extensive implementation details on a suggested solution (by requiring API design) but doesn't include a dedicated section for discussing alternatives. There probably should also be a place to discuss non-functional requirements (long-term goals, cost, security, resources, latency).

My instinct is,

  • Move "API Design" to the end and call it "Implementation Discussion" to make it more generally applicable
  • Add a dedicated section for Alternatives after Approach (maybe replace "Known Limitations" since that's the natural place to discuss pros/cons anyways?)
  • Add a "Long-Term Goals" section after discussing the Current State, which can make it easier to review the actual requirements for the solution, and do the sanity "does the solution solve the problem"-check

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants