Skip to content

Conversation

@celinval
Copy link
Contributor

Description of changes:

I would like to incorporate a few suggestions to the RFC process and template:

  1. Suggest that the first RFC revision should not include implementation details. Thanks @feliperodri for the suggestion.
  2. Change the template to (hopefully) clarify what should go in each section. @JustusAdam any suggestions?
  3. Change the template to clarify that open questions and future work should be simple lists.
  4. Replace --enable-unstable by -Z flag.

The main goal is to try to speed up the process by reducing the scope of the RFC document, breaking it down into multiple steps, and even reduce the need for an RFC entirely.

Resolved issues:

N/A

Related RFC:

Optional #ISSUE-NUMBER.

Call-outs:

Testing:

  • How is this change tested?

  • Is this a refactor change?

Checklist

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made
  • Methods or procedures are documented
  • Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 and MIT licenses.

Try to reduce the scope of the RFC
Suggest breaking the RFC review.
replace `--enable-unstable`
@celinval celinval requested a review from a team as a code owner August 29, 2023 00:43
Copy link
Contributor

@JustusAdam JustusAdam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A suggestion we had discussed before is adding who the intended audience for the RFC or each individual section is (if they differ). That should help the submitter understand what level of detail is expected and help them empathize with their audience. The UX section kinda has that already, but it's something that I think is worth emphasizing and putting either globally or in every section.

@celinval celinval enabled auto-merge (squash) September 8, 2023 19:56
@celinval celinval merged commit 1d7b0f9 into model-checking:main Sep 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

No open projects
Status: In Progress

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants