Many changes, including bug fixes and documentation improvements can be implemented and reviewed via the normal GitHub pull request workflow.
Some changes though are "substantial", and we ask that these be put through a bit of a design process and produce a consensus among the CppMicroServices core team.
The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for new features to enter the framework.
When you need to follow this process
You need to follow this process if you intend to make "substantial" changes to CppMicroServices or its documentation. What constitutes a "substantial" change is evolving based on community norms, but may include the following.
- A new feature that creates new API surface area.
- The removal of features that already shipped as part of the release.
- The introduction of new idiomatic usage or conventions, even if they do not include code changes to CppMicroServices itself.
Some changes do not require an RFC:
- Rephrasing, reorganizing or refactoring
- Additions only likely to be noticed by other implementors-of-CppMicroServices, invisible to users-of-CppMicroServices.
If you submit a pull request to implement a new feature without going through the RFC process, it may be closed with a polite request to submit an RFC first.
Gathering feedback before submitting
It's often helpful to get feedback on your concept before diving into the level of API design detail required for an RFC. You may open an issue on this repo to start a high-level discussion, with the goal of eventually formulating an RFC pull request with the specific implementation design.
What the process is
In short, to get a major feature added to CppMicroServices, one must first get the RFC merged into the RFC repo as a markdown file. At that point the RFC is 'active' and may be implemented with the goal of eventual inclusion into CppMicroServices.
- Fork the RFC repo http://github.com/CppMicroServices/rfcs
text/0000-my-feature.md(where 'my-feature' is descriptive. don't assign an RFC number yet).
- Fill in the RFC. Put care into the details: Typically, RFCs will have convincing motivation, demonstrate understanding of the impact of the design, and detail the drawbacks or alternatives.
- You can also choose to flesh out the design more formally - detailing the Requirements, Use Cases Analysis, Design Cases, Architectural Design etc.
- Submit a pull request. As a pull request the RFC will receive design feedback from the core team and the larger community, and the author should be prepared to revise it in response.
- In a subsequent commit to the pull request, fill in the RFC PR header
of the document
text/0000-my-feature.mdwith the URL of the pull request.
- At some point after the submission of the pull request, RFCs that are candidates for inclusion in CppMicroServices will enter a "final comment period" (FCP) lasting about two weeks. At-least three members of the core team will comment on the RFC during this window, if they hadn't done before. The beginning of this period will be signaled with a comment and tag on the RFC's pull request.
- An RFC may be rejected by the core team after the FCP and comments have been made summarizing the rationale for rejection. A member of the core team should then close the RFC's associated pull request.
- An RFC may be accepted after the FCP. A core team member
will rename the RFC from
the count of already approved pull requests + 1. For example, if the last approved RFC was named
text/0037-foo-feature.md, the current approved RFC will be renamed
text/0038-bar-feature.md. Then, that member will merge the RFC's associated pull request, at which point the RFC will become 'active'.
The RFC life-cycle
Once an RFC becomes active then authors may implement it and submit the feature as a pull request to the CppMicroServices repo. Becoming 'active' is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not mean the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that the core team has agreed to it in principle and are amenable to merging it.
Furthermore, the fact that a given RFC has been accepted and is 'active' implies nothing about what priority is assigned to its implementation, nor whether anybody is currently working on it.
Modifications to active RFC's can be done in followup PR's. We strive to write each RFC in a manner that it will reflect the final design of the feature; but the nature of the process means that we cannot expect every merged RFC to actually reflect what the end result will be at the time of the next major release; therefore we try to keep each RFC document somewhat in sync with the Framework feature as planned, tracking such changes via followup pull requests to the document.
Implementing an RFC
The author of an RFC is not obligated to implement it. Of course, the RFC author (like any other developer) is welcome to post an implementation for review after the RFC has been accepted.
If you are interested in working on the implementation for an 'active' RFC, but cannot determine if someone else is already working on it, feel free to ask (e.g. by leaving a comment on the associated issue).