Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
91 lines (70 loc) · 3.31 KB

0000-template.md

File metadata and controls

91 lines (70 loc) · 3.31 KB
Raw
  • Feature Name: (fill me in with a unique identifier, my_awesome_feature)
  • Start Date: (fill me in with today's date, YYYY-MM-DD)
  • RFC PR: (leave this empty)
  • Ursa Issue: (leave this empty)

Summary

One paragraph explanation of the feature.

Motivation

Why are we doing this? What is the unfulfilled requirement? What use cases does it support? What is the expected outcome?

Guide-level explanation

Explain the proposal as if it was already included in Ursa and you were teaching it to another Ursa programmer. That generally means:

  • Introducing new named concepts.
  • Explaining the feature largely in terms of examples.
  • Explaining how Ursa programmers should think about the feature, and how it should impact the way they use Ursa. It should explain the impact as concretely as possible.
  • If applicable, provide sample error messages, deprecation warnings, or migration guidance.
  • If applicable, describe the differences between teaching this to existing Ursa programmers and new Ursa programmers.
  • If applicable, describe any changes that may affect the security of communications or administration.

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.
  • Any new or altered interfaces should include pseudo-code.

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

Why should we not do this?

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?
  • For incorporating new protocol implementations what other implementations exist and why were they not selected?
  • For new protocols, what related protocols exist and why do the not satisfy requirements?

Prior art

Discuss prior art, both the good and the bad, in relation to this proposal. A few examples of what this can include are:

  • For other teams: What lessons can we learn from what other communities have done here?
  • Papers: Are there any published papers or great posts that discuss this? If you have some relevant papers to refer to, this can serve as a more detailed theoretical background.

This section is intended to encourage you as an author to think about the lessons from other distributed ledgers or cryptographic libraries and provide readers of your RFC with a fuller picture.

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?