From 8eb55f18a11d6b2f155c7c9d48ca833313ee13db Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Harsh Shandilya Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 19:42:31 +0530 Subject: Create issue template for RFCs (#1234) * github: update label directive in issue templates Signed-off-by: Harsh Shandilya * github: add an issue template for RFCs Signed-off-by: Harsh Shandilya --- .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rfc.md | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+) create mode 100644 .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rfc.md (limited to '.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rfc.md') diff --git a/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rfc.md b/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rfc.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..8938c653 --- /dev/null +++ b/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rfc.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +--- +name: RFC +about: Proposal for any major/breaking changes that warrants discussion over design and other aspects. Users should not need to use this. +title: "[RFC]" +labels: 'C-rfc, S-waiting-for-comment' +--- + +# 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? + +# 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. This can include +any other projects that have implemented similar changes, or any previous discussions that +have happened around this within the scope of this project. + +# 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 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? -- cgit v1.2.3