The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for new features or changes.
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 Gisquick core team and the community.
An RFC goes through the following stages:
- Pending: when the RFC is submitted as a PR.
- Active: when an RFC PR is merged and undergoing implementation.
- Landed: when an RFC's proposed changes are merged to master.
- Rejected: when an RFC PR is closed without being merged.
You need to follow this process if you intend to make "substantial" changes to any part of Gisquick platform listed below:
gisquick gisquick-settings qgis-plugin
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.
Other use case for RFC is to present "substantial" feature request, which should be implemented by Gisquick's core team. In this case, feature should be evaluated, and approximate cost of implemention should be estimated. If there will be enough will to accept this feature, and funding for development will be arranged, the RFC should become active and impleentation of feature should start.
Every new feature adds more complexity to the project. Sometimes it takes significant time to implement particular functionality, and also there may be demand for several similar features. It's better to have a consistent workflow for documenting of what is planned, new ideas and proposals, or for public discussion.
It's often helpful to get feedback on your concept before diving into the level of details 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 proposal/implementation.
In short, to get a major feature added to Gisquick, 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 Gisquick.
-
Fork the RFC repo https://github.com/gislab-npo/gisquick-rfcs
-
Copy
0000-template.mdtoactive-rfcs/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.
-
Submit a pull request. As a pull request the RFC will receive design feedback from the larger community, and the author should be prepared to revise it in response.
-
Build consensus and integrate feedback. RFCs that have broad support are much more likely to make progress than those that don't receive any comments.
-
Eventually, the [core team] will decide whether the RFC is a candidate for inclusion.
-
An RFC can be modified based upon feedback from the [core team] and community. Significant modifications may trigger a new final comment period.
-
An RFC may be rejected after public discussion has settled 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 at the close of its final comment period. A [core team] member will merge the RFC's associated pull request, at which point the RFC will become 'active'.
Once an RFC becomes active then authors may implement it and submit the feature as a pull request to the Gisquick 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.
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.
An active RFC should have the link to the implementation PR listed if there is one. Feedback to the actual implementation should be conducted in the implementation PR instead of the original RFC PR.
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).
Members of the [core team] will attempt to review some set of open RFC pull requests on a regular basis. If a core team member believes an RFC PR is ready to be accepted into active status, they can approve the PR using GitHub's review feature to signal their approval of the RFC.
Gisquick's RFC process owes its inspiration to the Vue RFC process and React RFC process