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

[Deliverable] Waku RFC Review #130

Closed
1 task
chair28980 opened this issue Feb 5, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed
1 task

[Deliverable] Waku RFC Review #130

chair28980 opened this issue Feb 5, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
Deliverable Tracks a Deliverable

Comments

@chair28980
Copy link
Contributor

chair28980 commented Feb 5, 2024

Milestone: https://github.com/waku-org/pm/milestone/19
Research Milestone

Summary

  • Goal: On completion, the set of RFCs for Waku will be simplified, reasonably up to date and accessible.
  • Deliverables: (3)
  • Research tracks: All
  • Estimated date of completion: 2024Q1

Review our Waku RFC strategy, review the content of the most important RFCs, improve RFC indexing and ensure that
important RFCs are easily identified and accessible.

2 outputs are expected to achieve this milestone:

Review and implement RFC strategy

Ownership note: this Epic is a collaboration between Waku Research (R/A) and Vac RFCs (C/I)

Consult with stakeholders (Waku teams, Waku Community and Vac RFC team) to come up with an improved strategy for Waku RFCs to answer:

  1. Should Waku RFCs be in a separate Waku-owned repo?
  2. What is the role of proof of concepts vs raw RFCs?
  3. How should Waku RFCs be indexed?
  4. How should Waku RFCs be presented to make important specs obvious and easy to find?
  5. Should we continue with the same RFC categories (Standards, Informational and Best Current Practices)?
  6. Should we continue with the same RFC tags (Waku core vs application)?
  7. Should we continue with the same COSS lifecycle? Should we add a "stagnant" status a la EIPs?
  8. How do we clarify the responsibility of the Vac team vs Waku team when it comes to RFCs?
  9. How can external contributors contribute or propose improvements to Waku specifications?
  10. Clarify intended scope of topics that can be covered in Waku RFCs, delineate categories clearly and revise the spec lifecycles.

This item includes actioning the new proposed strategy, such as potentially moving Waku specs to a waku-org repo,
updating references to these in documentation, adding/removing tags and categories, writing up the proposed strategy
in contributor guidelines, etc.

Epics

  • research:
@chair28980 chair28980 added the Deliverable Tracks a Deliverable label Feb 5, 2024
@fryorcraken fryorcraken added this to Waku Feb 5, 2024
@chair28980 chair28980 moved this to In Progress in Waku Feb 7, 2024
@jm-clius
Copy link

jm-clius commented Mar 8, 2024

Waku work on implementing this strategy is being done in https://github.com/waku-org/specs. This repo will be made public once work on both Vac and Waku repos are done.

@chair28980 chair28980 changed the title [Milestone] Waku RFC Review [Deliverable] Waku RFC Review Jun 19, 2024
@fryorcraken
Copy link
Contributor

Waku work on implementing this strategy is being done in waku-org/specs. This repo will be made public once work on both Vac and Waku repos are done.

It is public already. What "work" are you talking about please?

@jm-clius
Copy link

It is public already. What "work" are you talking about please?

I think you're responding to an old comment. :) Have spoken to @chair28980 and recommended that we close this issue as both https://github.com/waku-org/specs and the new rfc.vac.dev is now live.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress to Done in Waku Aug 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Deliverable Tracks a Deliverable
Projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants