Add RFC template
This commit is contained in:
		
							parent
							
								
									070bdf6f39
								
							
						
					
					
						commit
						1aa8f3a656
					
				
							
								
								
									
										87
									
								
								.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/RFC_report.md
									
									
									
									
										vendored
									
									
										Normal file
									
								
							
							
								
								
								
								
								
									
									
								
							
						
						
									
										87
									
								
								.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/RFC_report.md
									
									
									
									
										vendored
									
									
										Normal file
									
								
							| @ -0,0 +1,87 @@ | |||||||
|  | --- | ||||||
|  | name: RFC template | ||||||
|  | about: request for comments | ||||||
|  | title: "[RFC]" | ||||||
|  | labels: '' | ||||||
|  | assignees: '' | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | --- | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | <!--- Provide a general summary of the RFC in the Title above --> | ||||||
|  | - Feature Name: (fill me in with a unique ident, `my_awesome_feature`) | ||||||
|  | - Start Date: (fill me in with today's date, YYYY-MM-DD) | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Summary | ||||||
|  | [summary]: #summary | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | One paragraph explanation of the feature. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Motivation | ||||||
|  | [motivation]: #motivation | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected outcome? | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Guide-level explanation | ||||||
|  | [guide-level-explanation]: #guide-level-explanation | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | Explain the proposal as if it was already included in the Occlum and you were teaching it to another Occlum user. That generally means: | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | - Introducing new named concepts. | ||||||
|  | - Explaining the feature largely in terms of examples. | ||||||
|  | - If applicable, provide sample error messages, deprecation warnings, or migration guidance. | ||||||
|  | - If applicable, describe the differences between teaching this to existing Occlum users and new Occlum users. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Reference-level explanation | ||||||
|  | [reference-level-explanation]: #reference-level-explanation | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | This is the technical portion of the RFC. Explain the design in sufficient detail that: | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | - Its interaction with other features is clear. | ||||||
|  | - It is reasonably clear how the feature would be implemented. | ||||||
|  | - Corner cases are dissected by example. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | The section should return to the examples given in the previous section, and explain more fully how the detailed proposal makes those examples work. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Drawbacks | ||||||
|  | [drawbacks]: #drawbacks | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | Why should we *not* do this? | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Rationale and alternatives | ||||||
|  | [rationale-and-alternatives]: #rationale-and-alternatives | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | - Why is this design the best in the space of possible designs? | ||||||
|  | - What other designs have been considered and what is the rationale for not choosing them? | ||||||
|  | - What is the impact of not doing this? | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Prior art | ||||||
|  | [prior-art]: #prior-art | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | Discuss prior art, both the good and the bad, in relation to this proposal. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Unresolved questions | ||||||
|  | [unresolved-questions]: #unresolved-questions | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | - What parts of the design do you expect to resolve through the RFC process before this gets merged? | ||||||
|  | - What parts of the design do you expect to resolve through the implementation of this feature before stabilization? | ||||||
|  | - What related issues do you consider out of scope for this RFC that could be addressed in the future independently of the solution that comes out of this RFC? | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | # Future possibilities | ||||||
|  | [future-possibilities]: #future-possibilities | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | Think about what the natural extension and evolution of your proposal would | ||||||
|  | be and how it would affect the Occlum as a whole in a holistic way. Try to  | ||||||
|  | use this section as a tool to more fully consider all possible interactions  | ||||||
|  | with the project in your proposal. Also consider how this all fits into the  | ||||||
|  | roadmap for the project and of the relevant sub-team. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | This is also a good place to "dump ideas", if they are out of scope for the | ||||||
|  | RFC you are writing but otherwise related. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | If you have tried and cannot think of any future possibilities, | ||||||
|  | you may simply state that you cannot think of anything. | ||||||
|  | 
 | ||||||
|  | Note that having something written down in the future-possibilities section | ||||||
|  | is not a reason to accept the current or a future RFC; such notes should be | ||||||
|  | in the section on motivation or rationale in this or subsequent RFCs. | ||||||
|  | The section merely provides additional information. | ||||||
		Loading…
	
		Reference in New Issue
	
	Block a user