Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
58 lines (47 loc) · 2.67 KB

cap-template.md

File metadata and controls

58 lines (47 loc) · 2.67 KB
Raw

Preamble

CAP: To Be Assigned
Title: <CAP title>
Author: <List of authors' names and optionally, email addresses, separated by commas>
Status: Draft
Created: <date created on, in ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd) format>
Discussion: <link to where discussion for this CAP is taking place, typically the mailing list>
Protocol version: TBD

Simple Summary

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Please provide a simplified and layman-accessible explanation of the CAP.

Motivation

You should clearly explain why the existing protocol specification is inadequate to address the problem that the CAP solves. In particular, CAP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright.

Goals Alignment

You should reference the Stellar Network goal(s) that this proposal advances, such as:

  • The Stellar Network should run at scale and at low cost to all participants of the network.
  • The Stellar Network should enable cross-border payments.

Abstract

A short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed.

Specification

The technical specification should describe the syntax and semantics of any new feature.

Design Rationale

The rationale fleshes out the specification by describing what motivated the design and why particular design decisions were made. It should describe alternate designs that were considered and related work, e.g. how the feature is supported in other protocols. The rationale may also provide evidence of consensus within the community, and should discuss important objections or concerns raised during discussion.

Backwards Incompatibilities

All CAPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The CAP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. CAP submissions with an insufficient discussion of backwards compatibility may be rejected outright.

Security Concerns

All CAPs should carefully consider areas where security may be a concern, and document them accordingly. If a change does not have security implications, briefly explain why.

Test Cases

Test cases for an implementation are mandatory for CAPs that are affecting consensus changes. Other CAPs can choose to include links to test cases if applicable.

Implementation

The implementation(s) must be completed before any CAP is given "Final" status, but it need not be completed before the CAP is accepted. While there is merit to the approach of reaching consensus on the specification and rationale before writing code, the principle of "rough consensus and running code" is still useful when it comes to resolving many discussions of API details.