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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

feat: new process documentation #682

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

feat: new process documentation #682

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
40 changes: 40 additions & 0 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rfc.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
---
name: RFC
about: Request For Comment
title: '[RFC] <title>'
assignees:
labels:
---

<!--
# Before Opening Please...
- [ ] Search for an existing/duplicate RFC which might be relevant to your RFC
-->
## Motivation ("The Why")
<!-- Examples
Let us know why or how you thought of this idea. This should describe exactly
what problem your suggestion is meant to solve.
-->

### Example Use Cases
<!-- Examples
An example or two of how your suggestion can be used.
-->

### Current Behaviour / Workarounds
<!-- Examples
Is there a way to achieve your suggestion today? How?
-->

#### Desired Behaviour
<!-- Examples
How would you like things to generally work to cover your situation/context?
-->

### References
<!-- Examples
* Related/Reference to #0
* Depends on #0
* Blocked by #0
-->
* n/a
40 changes: 0 additions & 40 deletions .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/rrfc.md
View file
Open in desktop

This file was deleted.

187 changes: 30 additions & 157 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,186 +1,59 @@
# RFC Process
# The npm CLI RFC Process

This document describes the RFC process for the [npm
CLI](https://github.com/npm/cli), and provides a way for the [npm CLI
team](https://github.com/orgs/npm/teams/cli-team) and the wider community
to have discussions about the features and direction of the package
manager.
This document describes the RFC process for the npm CLI. The intent of this process is to provide the [npm CLI team](https://github.com/orgs/npm/teams/cli-team) as well as the broader npm team to gather feedback from our community, as well as providing a means for the community to have discussions about features and the direction of the npm package manager.

## What is an RFC?

The name is a reference to the **IETF's Request For Comments** process, and
involves a document or series of documents which are drafted, reviewed, and
eventually ratified (approved) by the npm team through discussion
among those interested, both within and outside of the npm team.
The name is a reference to the **IETF's Request For Comments** process. An RFC can propose any change to the npm CLI. In some cases an RFC may also propose changes to the public npm registry or other services, however changes outside of the npm CLI itself will require more time and engagement with the broader npm team in order to be ratified.

An RFC can propose any change to the npm CLI itself, and may include npm
registry changes meant to support that CLI change.
The npm team's roadmap is **not** determined by the RFC process. Approval of an RFC **does not** guarantee its implementation, only that if the work were to be completed to the standards upheld by the npm team the implementation will be accepted. If you open an RFC you should be prepared to carry it through implementation yourself. The npm CLI team maintains a presence in the [Open JS Foundation Slack](https://openjsf.org/collaboration/)'s `#npm` channel to assist community members through this process.

## Rough Consensus
## Review Process

The development of new features within the npm CLI follows a [Rough
Consensus](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7282) model, similar to the IETF.
After an RFC has been opened, the npm CLI team is responsible for providing an initial review within 2 weeks.

The following points are intended to help you understand and participate in
this process productively.
After this inital review the RFC will be added to the agenda of an upcoming Open Office Hours call. The author of the RFC will be notified when their RFC is scheduled for discussion, and is encouraged to join this call. Their participation in the call is not mandatory, and if they are unable to attend feedback will be gathered on their behalf and shared as comments to the RFC.

### Scope of This Process
All discussions surrounding an RFC are covered by the npm [Code of Conduct](https://www.npmjs.com/policies/conduct). Please keep conversations constructive, civil, and low-temperature. If tensions flare during discussion, the npm team may, at its own discretion, moderate, remove, or edit posts, as well as locking the discussion on that PR or the entire RFCs repository.

This RFC process is limited to issues concerning the [npm
cli](https://github.com/npm/cli) and the web services that support it.
### Approval and Rough Consensus

Of course we operate within a broad community ecosystem, and will often
choose to implement features in a way that is compatible with other package
management tools in the JavaScript community. However, if a given proposal
cannot or will not be implemented by other package managers, that is not in
itself reason enough to abandon a proposal. We are here to make _npm_
better.
The approval of RFCs follows a [Rough Consensus](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7282) model, similar to the IETF.

### Full Consensus is Not The Goal
Feedback is gathered through comments in the RFC issue as well as real time conversation during Open Office Hours. The purpose of this feedback is to provide a means for the community to raise objections to proposals. Each objection will be discussed and considered. It is not a goal for everyone to agree on all aspects of an RFC. Objections do not prevent an RFC from being ratified, but they must be given a fair hearing until an understanding is reached and an informed decision can be made.

It is not our intention, or within our ability, to accomodate every
possible objection to any given proposal. It _is_ our intention to surface
all such objections, and make an informed decision as to whether the
objection can be addressed, should be accepted, or is reason enough to
abandon the proposal entirely.
When a proposal no longer has **new** objections it has completed the review process and may move into implementation.

We encourage you to participate in these discussions, and to feel free and
comfortable bringing up any objections that you have or can imagine (even
if you don't entirely agree with the objection!)
While community feedback is an important part of our process, the npm CLI team holds the final authority for approving or rejecting an RFC.

Our job together then, is to ensure that the objection is given a fair
hearing, and is fully understood. Then (either in the pull request
comments, or in our OpenRFC meetings), we will decide whether the proposal
should be modified in light of the objection, or the objection should be
ignored, or if the proposal should be abandoned.
### Reasons an RFC could be rejected

If an objection is brought up a second time without any relevant changes,
after having already been addressed, then it will be ignored. Only _new_
objections merit new or continued consideration.
The npm team may choose to reject an RFC and close it. Here is a non-exhaustive list of reasons this could happen:

### Iterate on Building Blocks
1. The proposed feature is in direct conflict with existing features or is generally undesirable
2. There is no commitment to completing the work
3. Objections are raised that are deemed to be relevant and cannot be reasonably addressed
4. The feature is prohibitively difficult to implement
5. The feature is better addressed by an alternate proposal
6. The scope of changes extends beyond the reach of the npm CLI
7. The feature does not align with the future development direction of the npm CLI
8. The implementation has stalled with no clear path forward

Frequently a feature will be proposed or even fully specified in an RFC,
and upon analysis, the feedback might be to cut it into separate RFCs, or
implement another proposal first.
## Implementation and Communication

This can be frustrating at times, but it ensures that we are taking care
to improve npm iteratively, with thorough consideration of each step along
the way.
After an RFC is approved it will remain open as the primary means of communicating about the feature work. After the implementation is complete the npm team will review the changes made for code standards as well as ensuring that the implementation matches what was described in the RFC.

### Implementation as Exploration
### Modifying an RFC after approval

Typically, RFCs are discussed and ratified prior to implementation.
However, this is not always the case! Occasionally, we will develop a
feature then write an RFC after the fact to describe and discuss it prior
to merging into the latest npm release.

Very often, an RFC will be difficult to examine without running code. In
those cases, we may opt to develop a proof of concept (or even fully
production-ready implementation) of an RFC in process, in order to test it
in reality before accepting it.

Even when an RFC _is_ accepted, during implementation it is common to note
additional objections, features, or decisions that need to be made. In
these cases, we may propose an amendment to a previously ratified RFC.

### Final Authority

The ultimate authority as to the ratification of any given RFC proposal is
the npm CLI team, as they have ultimate authority over the direction and
development of the actual thing these RFCs are about.

## How do I create an RFC?

* Fork https://github.com/npm/rfcs
* Copy `accepted/0000-template.md` into `accepted/0000-your-rfc-name.md`
* Fill in and edit the template with your proposal
* Submit a PR to the `npm/rfcs` repo

## How does review work?

The official place for discussion for a proposed RFC is its pull request.
Anyone, both npm collaborators and non-collaborators, may participate in the
discussion and ask questions and provide (constructive) feedback. Keep in mind
that only npm collaborators are able to ratify the RFC itself, even if other
users can comment.

All discussions surrounding an RFC are covered by the [npm Code of
Conduct](https://www.npmjs.com/policies/conduct). Please keep conversations
constructive, civil, and low-temperature. If tensions flare during discussion,
the npm team may, at its own discretion, moderate, remove, or
edit posts, as well as locking the discussion on that PR or the entire RFCs
repository.

## How do RFCs get ratified?

An RFC is ratified when there is consensus among npm collaborators that it
should be accepted, and all objections have been considered. At that
point, it will be merged into the `latest` branch, and will be considered
"ratified".

It is common for an RFC to require multiple rounds of editing to address
concerns brought up in the discussion.

The RFC may be rejected altogether at the discretion of npm collaborators.
Reasons for this may include, but are not limited to:

- Objections are raised that are deemed to be relevant to the npm CLI, and
cannot be reasonably addressed within the RFC.
- The feature conflicts with another intended feature, or otherwise does
not align with the future development direction of the npm CLI.
- The feature described is prohibitively difficult to implement.
- The feature described is better addressed by an alternate proposal.

## What happens after ratification?

Once an RFC is ratified, the npm team agrees to merge a corresponding PR
implementing the described changes, provided it passes a standard code
review by the maintainers. It is **not** a guarantee of implementation, nor
does it obligate the npm team itself to implement the requested changes.

Actual integration into the CLI may also be deferred to a later date, or a
later semver-major CLI release, at the npm collaborators' discretion. All
the RFC does is communicate the team's intention to work in a given
direction.

Actual development work on the npm CLI will be ordered based on priorities
and resources that are well outside the scope of this RFC process.

### Implementation

When the changes described in an RFC have been implemented and merged into the
relevant repository (and thus, due to be released), the corresponding RFC will
be moved from `accepted/` to `implemented/`.

If you'd like to implement an accepted RFC, please make a PR in the
appropriate repo and mention the RFC in the PR. Feel free to do this even
for work-in-progress code. The npm CLI team will provide guidance to
ensure that the patch meets our standards and addresses the proposed RFC.

### Withdrawal

From time to time npm collaborators will review RFCs awaiting
implementation to ensure their accuracy and relevance. In cases where a
previously ratified RFC is deemed to no longer be a viable candidate for
implementation, an [**amendment section**](withdrawn/0000-template.md) will
be added **to the top** of the document outlining the reason for repeal and
subsequently moved to the `withdrawn/` section of this repository.

## How do I change an RFC after ratification?

RFCs themselves are typically only modified after ratification to address
unanswered questions that may require implementation exploration.

More often, if an RFC has been previously ratified, and either cannot be
implemented as described, or should be superceded by another proposal, it
will be withdrawn as part of another RFC submitted through this process.
It is possible that an RFC will require changes after it has been approved and implementation has begun. When this happens, the npm CLI team will use their discretion to determine if the RFC should be added back to an Open Office Hours agenda or to approve or reject the change, or the entire RFC, directly.

---

## Open Office Hours

In our ongoing efforts to better listen to & collaborate with the community, we've started an open office hours call that helps to move conversations on RFCs forward as well as help answer broader community questions. It is notably a call without an agenda but provides a synchronous forum to engage with the community beyond the discussion/comment threads in issues & PRs.
In our ongoing efforts to better listen to & collaborate with the community, we've started an open office hours call that helps to move conversations on RFCs forward as well as help answer broader community questions. It is meant to provide a synchronous forum to engage with the community beyond the discussion/comment threads in issues & PRs.

The first half of Open Office Hours is meant to discuss RFCs that are on the agenda. The second half is an open conversation allowing our community to ask questions, share what they're working on, talk about ideas or even just to say hello.

### When?

Expand Down