This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 17, 2022. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 404
Closed
[WIP] RFCs #38
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
7907287
Initial version: borrowed from React
turnrye ac10a51
Updated for more context and yaml metadata block
turnrye 0d5aa16
Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/react-native-community/re…
turnrye 1e6266c
Fixed weekly meeting mention
turnrye 16b6213
Updated README to reflect proposal rather than RFC
turnrye File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ | ||
--- | ||
title: Title goes here | ||
author: | ||
- Jane Doe | ||
date: today | ||
--- | ||
# RFC0000: Title goes here | ||
|
||
## Summary | ||
|
||
Brief explanation of the change. | ||
|
||
## Basic example | ||
|
||
If the proposal involves a new or changed API, include a basic code example. Omit this section if it's not applicable. | ||
|
||
## Motivation | ||
|
||
Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected outcome? | ||
|
||
Please focus on explaining the motivation so that if this RFC is not accepted, the motivation could be used to develop alternative solutions. In other words, enumerate the constraints you are trying to solve without coupling them too closely to the solution you have in mind. | ||
|
||
## Detailed design | ||
|
||
This is the bulk of the RFC. Explain the design in enough detail for somebody familiar with React Native to understand, and for somebody familiar with the implementation to implement. This should get into specifics and corner-cases, and include examples of how the feature is used. Any new terminology should be defined here. | ||
|
||
## Drawbacks | ||
|
||
Why should we *not* do this? Please consider: | ||
|
||
- implementation cost, both in term of code size and complexity | ||
- whether the proposed feature can be implemented in user space | ||
- the impact on teaching people React Native | ||
- integration of this feature with other existing and planned features | ||
- cost of migrating existing React Native applications (is it a breaking change?) | ||
|
||
There are tradeoffs to choosing any path. Attempt to identify them here. | ||
|
||
## Alternatives | ||
|
||
What other designs have been considered? Why did you select your approach? | ||
|
||
## Adoption strategy | ||
|
||
If we implement this proposal, how will existing React Native developers adopt it? Is this a breaking change? Can we write a codemod? Should we coordinate with other projects or libraries? | ||
|
||
## How we teach this | ||
|
||
What names and terminology work best for these concepts and why? How is this idea best presented? As a continuation of existing React patterns? | ||
|
||
Would the acceptance of this proposal mean the React Native documentation must be re-organized or altered? Does it change how React Native is taught to new developers at any level? | ||
|
||
How should this feature be taught to existing React Native developers? | ||
|
||
## Unresolved questions | ||
|
||
Optional, but suggested for first drafts. What parts of the design are still TBD? |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@ | ||
# React Native RFCs | ||
|
||
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 React Native core team. | ||
|
||
The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for new features to enter the project. | ||
|
||
[Active RFC List](https://github.com/react-native-community/react-native-releases/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3Arfc) | ||
|
||
As a new project, React Native is still **actively developing** this process, and it will still change as more features are implemented and the community settles on specific approaches to feature development. | ||
|
||
## When to follow this process | ||
|
||
You should consider using this process if you intend to make "substantial" changes to React Native or its documentation. Some examples that would benefit from an RFC are: | ||
|
||
- A new feature that creates new API surface area, and would require a feature flag if introduced. | ||
- The removal of features that already shipped as part of the release channel. | ||
- The introduction of new idiomatic usage or conventions, even if they do not include code changes to React Native itself. | ||
|
||
The RFC process is a great opportunity to get more eyeballs on your proposal before it becomes a part of a released version of React Native. Quite often, even proposals that seem "obvious" can be significantly improved once a wider group of interested people have a chance to weigh in. | ||
|
||
The RFC process can also be helpful to encourage discussions about a proposed feature as it is being designed, and incorporate important constraints into the design while it's easier to change, before the design has been fully implemented. | ||
|
||
Some changes do not require an RFC: | ||
|
||
- Rephrasing, reorganizing or refactoring | ||
- Addition or removal of warnings | ||
- Additions that strictly improve objective, numerical quality criteria (speedup, better browser support) | ||
- Additions only likely to be _noticed by_ other implementors, invisible to users | ||
|
||
## What the process is | ||
|
||
In short, to get a major feature added to React Native, one usually first gets 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 React Native. | ||
|
||
- Fork the RFC repo [react-native-community/react-native-releases](http://github.com/react-native-community/react-native-releases) | ||
- Copy `rfcs/0000-template.md` to `rfcs/0000-my-feature.md` (where 'my-feature' is the title in kebab case; don't assign an RFC number yet). | ||
- Fill in the RFC. Put care into the details: **RFCs that do not present convincing motivation, demonstrate understanding of the impact of the design, or are disingenuous about the drawbacks or alternatives tend to be poorly-received**. | ||
- Submit a pull request with the label "rfc". 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 team will decide whether the RFC is a candidate for inclusion in React Native. | ||
- RFCs that are candidates for inclusion in React Native will enter a "final comment period" lasting 7 days. The beginning of this period will be signaled with a comment and tag on the RFC's pull request. | ||
- An RFC can be modified based upon feedback from the team and community. Significant modifications may trigger a new final comment period. | ||
- An RFC may be rejected by the team after public discussion has settled and comments have been made summarizing the rationale for rejection. A member of the team should then close the RFC's associated pull request. | ||
- An RFC may be accepted at the close of its final comment period. A team 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 React Native 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 language 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). | ||
|
||
## Reviewing RFC's | ||
|
||
Each week the team will attempt to review some set of open RFC pull requests. | ||
|
||
We try to accept RFCs at the monthly team meeting, and actions are recorded in the meeting minutes. Every accepted feature should have a core team champion, who will represent the feature and its progress. | ||
|
||
**React Native's RFC process owes its inspiration to the [Rust RFC process], the [Ember RFC process], the [Yarn RFC process], and the [React RFC process]** | ||
|
||
[Yarn RFC process]: https://github.com/yarnpkg/rfcs | ||
[React RFC process]: https://github.com/reactjs/rfcs | ||
[Rust RFC process]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs | ||
[Ember RFC process]: https://github.com/emberjs/rfcs |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe change
rfcs/0000-my-feature.md
torfcs/XXXX-my-feature.md
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The RFC number isn't known until the PR is made; they wont know it yet.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes it was simply to "make more clear" that is was still an undefined number. No strong opinions anyway