Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Author to RFC Metadata #64

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Apr 13, 2020
Merged
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
60 changes: 60 additions & 0 deletions text/0000-add-author.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
# Meta
[meta]: #meta
- Name: Add Author to RFC Metadata
- Start Date: 2020-03-14
- CNB Pull Request: https://github.com/buildpacks/rfcs/pull/64
- CNB Issue: (leave blank)
- Supersedes: (put "N/A" unless this replaces an existing RFC, then link to that RFC)

# Summary
[summary]: #summary

This is a proposal to add an `Author(s):` field to the `Meta` section of the RFC template.

# Motivation
[motivation]: #motivation

When an RFC is merged, and then renamed, the commit history is lost. This makes it difficult to remember who wrote the RFC. Sometimes, an RFC is written by more than one person, but the linked PR will not always show this.

# What it is
[what-it-is]: #what-it-is

A new `Author(s):` field in the Meta section of the RFC template.

# How it Works
[how-it-works]: #how-it-works

We will add the following to the RFC `Meta` section:

```
- Author(s): (Github usernames)
- RFC Pull Request: (leave blank)
```

# Drawbacks
[drawbacks]: #drawbacks

Even though the author will be know, the commit history is still hard to find.

# Alternatives
[alternatives]: #alternatives

## RFC PR Link

Instead of an author field, we could only enforce that a link to the original RFC PR be added to the RFC after it's merged. This would make it easier to find the author and the history, but we would need to ensure that all authors are represented in the PR.

# Prior Art
[prior-art]: #prior-art

- Rust uses an ["RFC PR" link](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/0000-template.md)
- TensorFlow has an ["Author(s)" field](https://github.com/tensorflow/community/blob/master/rfcs/yyyymmdd-rfc-template.md)

# Unresolved Questions
[unresolved-questions]: #unresolved-questions

- Does this make it look like only a few person contributed to the RFC (when in reality they are a collaborative process)?
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe, but with the easy access to the discussion you can always check the history. We could also encourage / welcome more folks to the RFC process. :)


# Spec. Changes (OPTIONAL)
[spec-changes]: #spec-changes

None