WordPress-Coding-Standards/rfcs

Name: rfcs

Owner: WordPress Coding Standards

Description: RFCs for changes to WordPress Coding Standards

Created: 2018-02-14 05:07:37.0

Updated: 2018-04-02 14:23:58.0

Pushed: 2018-03-27 22:00:09.0

Homepage: null

Size: 19

Language: null

GitHub Committers

User	Most Recent Commit	# Commits

Other Committers

User	Email	Most Recent Commit	# Commits

README

WordPress Coding Standards RFCs

Changes to WPCS/docs 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 consultation process and produce a consensus among the WordPress Core and WordPress Coding Standards teams.

The “RFC” (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for new coding standards to enter the project.

Active RFC List

WordPress Coding Standards is still actively developing this process, and it will still change as more features are implemented and the community settles on specific approaches to further coding standards development.

When to follow this process

You should consider using this process if you intend to make changes to the WordPress Coding Standards or its documentation.

The RFC process can also be helpful to encourage discussions about a proposed coding standard as it is currently implemented.

What the process is

In short, to get a major change to the WordPress Coding Standards, 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 the WordPress Coding Standards.

• Fork the RFCs repo http://github.com/WordPress-Coding-Standards/rfcs
• Copy 0000-template.md to text/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: 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. 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 the WordPress Coding Standards.
• RFCs that are candidates for inclusion in the WordPress Coding Standards will enter a “final comment period” lasting 7 calendar days. The beginning of this period will be signaled with a comment and tag on the RFCs 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 RFCs associated pull request.
• An RFC may be accepted at the close of its final comment period. A team member will merge the RFCs 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 [WPCS/docs 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 RFCs can be done in followup PRs. 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 RFCs

Every accepted feature should have a core team champion, who will represent the feature and its progress.

WPCSs RFC process owes its inspiration to the Yarn RFC process and React RFC process