Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
240 lines (169 loc) · 10.2 KB

YYYYMMDD-template.md

File metadata and controls

240 lines (169 loc) · 10.2 KB
Raw
title authors reviewers creation-date last-updated status see-also replaces superseded-by
proposal Template
@janedoe
@janedoe
yyyy-mm-dd
yyyy-mm-dd
provisional|implementable|implemented|deferred|rejected|withdrawn|replaced
/docs/proposals/20190101-we-heard-you-like-proposals.md
/docs/proposals/20190102-everyone-gets-a-proposal.md
/docs/proposals/20181231-replaced-proposal.md
/docs/proposals/20190104-superceding-proposal.md

Title

This is the title of the proposal. Keep it simple and descriptive. A good title can help communicate what the proposal is and should be considered as part of any review.

The title should be lowercased and spaces/punctuation should be replaced with -.

To get started with this template:

  1. Make a copy of this template. Copy this template into docs/enhacements and name it YYYYMMDD-my-title.md, where YYYYMMDD is the date the proposal was first drafted.
  2. Fill out the "overview" sections. This includes the Summary and Motivation sections.
  3. Create a PR.
  4. Merge early. Avoid getting hung up on specific details and instead aim to get the goal of the proposal merged quickly. The best way to do this is to just start with the "Overview" sections and fill out details incrementally in follow on PRs. View anything marked as a provisional as a working document and subject to change. Aim for single topic PRs to keep discussions focused. If you disagree with what is already in a document, open a new PR with suggested changes.

The canonical place for the latest set of instructions (and the likely source of this file) is here.

The Metadata section above is intended to support the creation of tooling around the proposal process. This will be a YAML section that is fenced as a code block. See the proposal process for details on each of these items.

Table of Contents

A table of contents is helpful for quickly jumping to sections of a proposal and for highlighting any additional information provided beyond the standard proposal template. Tools for generating a table of contents from markdown are available.

Summary

The Summary section is incredibly important for producing high quality user-focused documentation such as release notes or a development roadmap. It should be possible to collect this information before implementation begins in order to avoid requiring implementors to split their attention between writing release notes and implementing the feature itself.

A good summary is probably at least a paragraph in length.

Motivation

This section is for explicitly listing the motivation, goals and non-goals of this proposal. Describe why the change is important and the benefits to users. The motivation section can optionally provide links to experience reports to demonstrate the interest in a proposal within the wider Kubernetes community.

Goals

List the specific goals of the proposal. How will we know that this has succeeded?

Non-Goals

What is out of scope for this proposal? Listing non-goals helps to focus discussion and make progress.

Proposal

This is where we get down to the nitty gritty of what the proposal actually is.

User Stories [optional]

Detail the things that people will be able to do if this proposal is implemented. Include as much detail as possible so that people can understand the "how" of the system. The goal here is to make this feel real for users without getting bogged down.

Story 1

Story 2

Implementation Details/Notes/Constraints [optional]

What are the caveats to the implementation? What are some important details that didn't come across above. Go in to as much detail as necessary here. This might be a good place to talk about core concepts and how they releate.

Risks and Mitigations

What are the risks of this proposal and how do we mitigate. Think broadly. For example, consider both security and how this will impact the larger kubernetes ecosystem.

How will security be reviewed and by whom? How will UX be reviewed and by whom?

Consider including folks that also work outside the SIG or subproject.

Design Details

Test Plan

Note: Section not required until targeted at a release.

Consider the following in developing a test plan for this enhancement:

  • Will there be e2e and integration tests, in addition to unit tests?
  • How will it be tested in isolation vs with other components?

No need to outline all of the test cases, just the general strategy. Anything that would count as tricky in the implementation and anything particularly challenging to test should be called out.

All code is expected to have adequate tests (eventually with coverage expectations). Please adhere to the Kubernetes testing guidelines when drafting this test plan.

Graduation Criteria

Note: Section not required until targeted at a release.

Define graduation milestones.

These may be defined in terms of API maturity, or as something else. Initial proposal should keep this high-level with a focus on what signals will be looked at to determine graduation.

Consider the following in developing the graduation criteria for this enhancement:

Clearly define what graduation means by either linking to the API doc definition, or by redefining what graduation means.

In general, we try to use the same stages (alpha, beta, GA), regardless how the functionality is accessed.

Examples

These are generalized examples to consider, in addition to the aforementioned maturity levels.

Alpha -> Beta Graduation
  • Gather feedback from developers and surveys
  • Complete features A, B, C
  • Tests are in Testgrid and linked in proposal
Beta -> GA Graduation
  • N examples of real world usage
  • N installs
  • More rigorous forms of testing e.g., downgrade tests and scalability tests
  • Allowing time for feedback

Note: Generally we also wait at least 2 releases between beta and GA/stable, since there's no opportunity for user feedback, or even bug reports, in back-to-back releases.

Removing a deprecated flag
  • Announce deprecation and support policy of the existing flag
  • Two versions passed since introducing the functionality which deprecates the flag (to address version skew)
  • Address feedback on usage/changed behavior, provided on GitHub issues
  • Deprecate the flag

For non-optional features moving to GA, the graduation criteria must include conformance tests.

Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy

If applicable, how will the component be upgraded and downgraded? Make sure this is in the test plan.

Consider the following in developing an upgrade/downgrade strategy for this enhancement:

  • What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing cluster required to make on upgrade in order to keep previous behavior?
  • What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing cluster required to make on upgrade in order to make use of the enhancement?

Version Skew Strategy

If applicable, how will the component handle version skew with other components? What are the guarantees? Make sure this is in the test plan.

Consider the following in developing a version skew strategy for this enhancement:

  • Does this enhancement involve coordinating behavior in the control plane and in the kubelet? How does an n-2 kubelet without this feature available behave when this feature is used?
  • Will any other components on the node change? For example, changes to CSI, CRI or CNI may require updating that component before the kubelet.

Implementation History

Major milestones in the life cycle of a proposal should be tracked in Implementation History. Major milestones might include

  • the Summary and Motivation sections being merged signaling acceptance
  • the Proposal section being merged signaling agreement on a proposed design
  • the date implementation started
  • the first Kubernetes release where an initial version of the proposal was available
  • the version of Kubernetes where the proposal graduated to general availability
  • when the proposal was retired or superseded

Drawbacks [optional]

Why should this proposal not be implemented.

Alternatives [optional]

Similar to the Drawbacks section the Alternatives section is used to highlight and record other possible approaches to delivering the value proposed by a proposal.