Skip to content
Branch: master
Find file Copy path
Find file Copy path
Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
101 lines (67 sloc) 5.03 KB

BEP-0001 BONSAI (BEP) Enhancement Proposal Template

Number 1
Title BONSAI (BEP) Enhancement Proposal Template
Status Approved
Type Guidelines
Proposed By Chris Mutel, Romain Sacchi, Michele De Rosa
Editor Michele De Rosa
Created 2019-03-08
Last updated 2019-03-12
Version 2


A short (less than 200 word) description of the issue being addressed.

The Abstract section is important for producing high quality user-focused documentation such as release notes or a development roadmap.


Clearly explain why the existing specifications is inadequate to address the problem that the BEP solves


Detailed description of the proposed idea of solution. Normative statements should follow RFC 2119. Must include the following subsections (some of which are optional); additional sections may be added:

The proposal does not need to be exhaustive, if the proposed standards or software are otherwise available and well documented, especially as part of the BONSAMURAIS repository.


Mandatory. Describe why particular design decisions were made.

Pros and Cons

Optional. May be free-form text or bullet lists


Mandatory. Ideas that were not ultimately selected

Open Issues

Optional. Relevant issues or questions not governed or resolved by this BEP


Optional. Listing non-goals helps to focus discussion and make progress

Test plan and results

Mandatory. How can one show the usefulness of the proposal in practice? The test phase must be completed and results documented before the BEP vote.

BEP metadata

The BEP header table should contain the following:

  • Number: Integer number, also used in the filename. Self-assigned ascending integers starting from 1.
  • Title: This is the title of the KEP. Keep it simple and descriptive.
  • Status: One of:
    • draft: Incomplete proposal being worked on by the authors and editor
    • proposed: Complete proposal open for discussion by the community, or being voted on
    • deferred: Complete proposal not currently under public discussion
    • accepted
    • rejected
    • withdrawn
    • superseded
  • Type: One of:
    • Software features: Describes a new feature or implementation for BONSAI.
    • Guidelines: Provides general guidelines or information to the BONSAI community, but does not propose a new feature.
  • Proposed by: Name and email of proposer
  • Editor: Name and email of editor
  • Created: Date in YYYY-MM-DD format
  • Last updated: Date in YYYY-MM-DD format
  • Version: Ascending integer number starting from 1
  • Replaces: Optional row if this BEP replaces an existing proposal
  • Superseded by: Optional row if this BEP has itself been replaced

Note that the BEP process is governed by [BEP 3: BONSAI project community governance structure].


A comprehensive bullet list of link to where the BEP has been discussed by the community, such as the BONSAI mailing list, and Github pull requests and issues. For example, this template is discussed in:

  • the BONSAI discussion list, tagged with #BEP0001

A procedure to implement/reject modifications to the BEP shall be mentioned in the proposal. Depending on the type of BEP, examples can be one or more of the following options:

  • BEP result of working groups already reflect some level of consensus, and will have a history of how the specifics came to be. In this case, the author will mention that the group is the primary and preliminary place for discussing the proposal, before it is made public.
  • Once the BEP is public, the authors should publicly respond to suggested changes by either accepting the changes, or providing their reasons to reject the suggested changes. Since the proposal has to be agreed by the broader community, it is in the interest of the authors to agree to reasonable change requests - otherwise the proposal won't survive a vote.
  • If discussion is particularly heated, the authors may invite changes via pull request which would be voted on by the community following the same voing rules as BEP acceptance. To avoid voting overload, this procedure should only be used in special cases.
  • Alternatively, the authors or the editor may invite dissenting discussion participants to phone or in-person conferences to reach consensus on difficult issues.

Previous Versions

Bullet list of all previous versions with links


To the extent possible under law, Chris Mutel, Romain Sacchi and Michele De Rosa have waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to Bonsai Enhancement Proposal 1: BONSAI (BEP) Enhancement Proposal Template. This work is published from: Switzerland & Denmark.

You can’t perform that action at this time.