RFC: The Life and Death of an API

[Gankro]

Adds a proper path for APIs to migrate from unstable to stable, including a
full shepherd and final comment period. Also establishes guidelines for
how RFCs and PRs should be handled and when RFCs or PRs should be preferred.

Rendered

[nrc]

I intend to edit README.md to include some of the general process stuff and then have per-sub-team specifics linked from there (not as meta-RFCs). I'll use this as the basis for the libs doc. Lets discuss here, but the path forward will probably be closing this PR and taking the text elsewhere.

[alexcrichton]

👍

[brson]

Seems ok to me. I agree with @nrc this should be in the README though.

[Gankro]

That's cool with me; I misunderstood what nrc was asking for. Although
there are still some details to hash out they could probably just as easily
be hashed out on internals. Although perhaps this benefits from being in a
more public forum (internals being more insular)?

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Brian Anderson notifications@github.com
wrote:

Seems ok to me. I agree with @nrc https://github.com/nrc this should be
in the README though.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1213 (comment).

[ruuda]

I think having all the time in the world and being a hobbyist or student are pretty much orthogonal.

[Gankro]

They're pretty highly correlated in my experience. A non-trivial percentage of our most active contributors are:

• Mozilla employees who are literally paid to work on Rust and Rust Accessories
• Students who are volunteering their time

[ruuda]

Is that typo intentional?

[Gankro]

yes

[Ericson2314]

In #1184 Gankro says:

APIs need not be in their final form before being stabilized. They just need to go through an FCP, at the end of which it is reasonable to make a minor tweak (as is the case for RFCs). The beta-period ensures that they will be in their final form for a whole period before hitting stable.

An API should be unstable for >= 1 cycles, then FCP for 1 cycle, then stable for a beta period, and then "stable on stable". On the unstable->FCP, or FCP->stable transitions, it may be amended? But once it is in beta it must be sent back to unstable or kept as is? Sounds fine, just want to (again) clarify.

[Gankro]

@Ericson2314 that seems reasonable to me, yes.

[Gankro]

Killing in favour of #1224